Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-12
review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-12-secdir-lc-eastlake-2019-03-22-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp |
|---|---|---|
| Requested rev. | no specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2019-03-20 | |
| Requested | 2019-03-06 | |
| Draft last updated | 2019-03-22 | |
| Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -10 by Andrew Malis
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -12 by Donald Eastlake (diff) Genart Last Call review of -12 by David Schinazi (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -13 by Tim Chown |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Donald Eastlake |
| State | Completed | |
| Review | review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-12-secdir-lc-eastlake-2019-03-22 | |
| Reviewed rev. | 12 (document currently at 13) | |
| Review result | Ready | |
| Review completed: | 2019-03-22 |
Review
review-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-p2mp-12-secdir-lc-eastlake-2019-03-22
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. The summary of the review is Ready. Although the Security Considerations section is fairly short, it has references to a number of relevant earlier RFCs that have quite extensive Security Considerations sections. Furthermore PCEP was previous extended to cover P2MP Traffic Engineered Label Switched Paths and separately extended to be stateful. This draft's addition of support for stateful P2MP TE LSPs is not that big of a change in Security Considerations from those in the earlier RFCs. Editorial Section 3.2, Page 5, "are same as" -> "are the same as" Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com