Subject: [lisp] FW: SECDIR review of draft-ietf-lisp-pubsub-06

From: "Alberto Rodriguez Natal (natal)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 04:35:26 +0000

While working on the PubSub slides for the WG session, I realized that the WG list was not in CC on the SECDIR review of PubSub. 

Forwarding the review now in case some of you might have missed it.

Alberto

On 10/1/20, 5:35 AM, "Chris Lonvick" <[email-masked]> wrote:

    Hi,

    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.

    This is an "Early Review Request" so I'm going to mark the draft as 
    READY WITH NITS.

    It appears that there's a raft of drafts of LISP documents progressing 
    together through the WG that cross-reference each other in that they all 
    provide foundation and support for their collective features. (I'll 
    admit that I haven't been keeping up.) So if my nits have been addressed 
    in another document, that just means that I didn't dig far or deep 
    enough so please consider giving a pointer in the Security 
    Considerations of this document so others won't similarly be left adrift.

    In this document, and the associated others that I peered into, the term 
    "nonce" seems to be used more as a "token" than, well, what I consider 
    to be a nonce. In one case it may be a random value, but in several 
    others the value is stored, compared, and reused.  This is inconsistent 
    with the IETF's Security Glossary RFC 4949.

    Also, there is a reference to increasing the nonce for a particular use. 
    However, I saw no discussion of what to do when the value exceeds the 
    field space.

    Other than that, the document appears to be well written and well 
    thought out.

    Best regards,

    Chris