Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13
review-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13-secdir-lc-salowey-2019-10-13-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 14)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2019-10-14
Requested 2019-09-30
Authors Anthony Chan, Xinpeng Wei, Jong-Hyouk Lee, Seil Jeon, Carlos Bernardos
Draft last updated 2019-10-13
Completed reviews Tsvart Last Call review of -13 by Yoshifumi Nishida (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -13 by Qin Wu (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -13 by Joseph Salowey (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -13 by Paul Kyzivat (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Joseph Salowey
State Completed
Review review-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13-secdir-lc-salowey-2019-10-13
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/4udcfE2ZM8u99xE9cwkRnFd8-pI
Reviewed rev. 13 (document currently at 14)
Review result Has Issues
Review completed: 2019-10-13

Review
review-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13-secdir-lc-salowey-2019-10-13

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the 
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat 
these comments just like any other last call comments.

The summary of the review is the document has issues with the security considerations section. 

The security consideration section is extremely light.  It mainly contains text from RFC 7333.  It seems that there should be more discussion of security as it relates to the different configurations and different cases.   Do each of these cases have the same security properties and require the same types of security controls?  

Are the IPSEC recommendations mentioned in the security considerations of draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models-04 applicable for all the cases?   Should these be pointed out in the security considerations section?