Subject: Re: [trill] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-trill-rfc7180bis-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:15:36 -0400

HI Kathleen,

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Kathleen Moriarty
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-trill-rfc7180bis-06: No Objection
>
> ...
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trill-rfc7180bis/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The security considerations text left me wondering what "some" of the
> changes were as there is only one consideration listed.
> Are there considerations for this change:
>
> Appendix C.2
>  3. Change for the requirement to use the RPF check in [RFC6325] for
>       multi-destination TRILL Data packets by providing an alternative
>       stronger RPF check.
>
> Or for any other changes?

As discussed in the body of the document for that change, if you use
the existing RPF check then you can get rare transient conditions on
multi-access links with three or more TRILL switch ports attached
where multi-destination TRILL data packets can be duplicated. (But
there are reasons for not mandating always using the new stronger RPF
check.) Perhaps that should be spelled out in the Security
Considerations section. Other than that, I do not think there are any
Security Considerations from the changes.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

> Thanks.