Subject: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-11

From: Shawn M Emery <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 23:57:30 -0700

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 draft describes protocol extensions for interfacing with 
Generalized Multi Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) 
Multi-Layer/Multi-Region Networks.

The security considerations section does exist and references 
draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework for the various 
attacks and their possible solutions regarding MPLS/GMPLS.  The section 
then discloses that a call controller should not be reachable from an 
external Traffic Engineering domain.  Then discusses that in order to 
prevent MITM attacks that IKE MUST be used between edge nodes and 
terminating calls.  After reading this draft and the security-framework 
draft it seems that they cover the threat models sufficiently.

General comments:

None.

Editorial comments:

Introduction:

PSC and L2SC are expanded, therefore:
s/TDM/Time-Division Multiplexing (TDM)/

- -
Shawn.

---

From: Adrian Farrel <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:45:16 +0000

Thanks Shawn!

Nit entered as RFC Editor note.

Cheers,
Adrian
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Shawn M Emery" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; 
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 6:57 AM
Subject: Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-11

> 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 draft describes protocol extensions for interfacing with Generalized 
> Multi Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Multi-Layer/Multi-Region Networks.
>
> draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework for the various attacks 
> and their possible solutions regarding MPLS/GMPLS.  The section then 
> discloses that a call controller should not be reachable from an external 
> Traffic Engineering domain.  Then discusses that in order to prevent MITM 
> attacks that IKE MUST be used between edge nodes and terminating calls. 
> After reading this draft and the security-framework draft it seems that 
> they cover the threat models sufficiently.
>
> General comments:
>
> None.
>
> Editorial comments:
>
> Introduction:
>