Subject: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-07

From: Russ Housley via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 09:17:15 -0700

Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review result: Has Issues

I 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 authors, document editors, and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other IETF Last Call comments.

Document: draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-07
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2021-09-21
IETF LC End Date: 2021-09-28
IESG Telechat date: Unknown

Summary: Has Issues

Major Concerns:  None

Minor Concerns:

General: All of the field names in this document use camel case, except
one.  I think the document would be easier to read if My Discriminator
were to use the same convention.  Also, HeadDiscriminator would be
more descriptive.

Section 2.1 says:

   The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hello
   messages.

This MUST statement cold me much more complete:

   The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hello
   messages, and it MUST include a 4-byte My Discriminator with a
   value other than zero.

Section 2.3: s/must set/MUST set/

Nits:

Section 1, para 1 could be more clear and more forceful.  I suggest:

   Faster convergence in the control plane minimizes the periods of
   traffic blackholing, transient routing loops, and other situations
   that may negatively affect service data flow.  Faster convergence
   in the control plane is beneficial to unicast and multicast routing
   protocols.

Section 1, para 2: s/DR is to act on behalf/DR acts on behalf/

Section 1, para 3: The first sentence is very unclear.  I cannot offer
an improvement because it is too hard to parse.

Section 1, para 3: s/networks precisely/networks, and it precisely/

Section 1.1.1: s/familiarity/Familiarity/

---

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 16:20:35 -0700

Hi Russ,
thank you for your thorough review, thoughtful and helpful suggestions.
Please find my notes in-lined below under the GIM>> tag. I've attached the
new working version and the diff.

Regards,
Greg

> were to use the same convention.  Also, HeadDiscriminator would be
GIM>> Thank you for pointing this out to me. I agree with the proposed
update of the field name, The remaining in the text references to My
Discriminator use the convention of RFC 5880. I hope that is acceptable.

>    messages, and it MUST include a 4-byte My Discriminator with a
GIM>> Thank you, I agree with the proposed text with a minor modification
based on re-naming of the field to HeadDiscriminator. Below is the update:
OLD TEXT:
   The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hello
   messages.
NEW TEXT:
    The head MUST include the BFD Discriminator option in its Hello
   messages, and it MUST include a 4-byte HeadDiscriminator with a value
   other than zero.

> Section 2.3: s/must set/MUST set/
GIM>> Thank you. Done.

>    in the control plane is beneficial to unicast and multicast routing
GIM>> Thank you for the suggested text. Accepted.

> Section 1, para 2: s/DR is to act on behalf/DR acts on behalf/
GIM>> Thank you. Done.

> an improvement because it is too hard to parse.
GIM>> Would the following update make it clearer:
OLD TEXT:
   Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC5880] had been
   originally defined to detect a failure of point-to-point (p2p) paths
   - single-hop [RFC5881], multihop [RFC5883].
 NEW TEXT:
   Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC5880] had been
   originally defined to detect a failure of a point-to-point (p2p)
   path, single-hop [RFC5881] or multihop [RFC5883].

> Section 1, para 3: s/networks precisely/networks, and it precisely/
GIM>> Thank you. Accepted.

> Section 1.1.1: s/familiarity/Familiarity/
GIM>> Done.

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 14:44:07 -0400

Thanks.  Your proposed changes resolve all of my comments.

Russ

> On Sep 21, 2021, at 7:20 PM, Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Russ,
> thank you for your thorough review, thoughtful and helpful suggestions. Please find my notes in-lined below under the GIM>> tag. I've attached the new working version and the diff.
> 
> Regards,
> Greg
> 
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:17 AM Russ Housley via Datatracker <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
> Reviewer: Russ Housley
> GIM>> Thank you for pointing this out to me. I agree with the proposed update of the field name, The remaining in the text references to My Discriminator use the convention of RFC 5880. I hope that is acceptable.
> 
> Section 2.1 says:
> 
> GIM>> Thank you, I agree with the proposed text with a minor modification based on re-naming of the field to HeadDiscriminator. Below is the update:
> OLD TEXT:
> <draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-08.txt><Diff_ draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-07.txt - draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-08.txt.html>-- 
> last-call mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

---

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 11:56:58 -0700

Russ,
thank you for the review, comments, and suggestions. I've uploaded the
updated version -08.

Regards,
Greg

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 11:44 AM Russ Housley <[email-masked]> wrote:

> <draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-08.txt><Diff_
> draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-07.txt -
> draft-ietf-pim-bfd-p2mp-use-case-08.txt.html>--
> last-call mailing list
> [email-masked]