Subject: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 20:13:50 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element of the IETF.

        Title           : Secure Transport for PCEP
        Authors         : Diego R. Lopez
                          Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
                          Qin Wu
                          Dhruv Dhody
	Filename        : draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11.txt
	Pages           : 18
	Date            : 2017-01-02

Abstract:
   The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) defines
   the mechanisms for the communication between a Path Computation
   Client (PCC) and a Path Computation Element (PCE), or among PCEs.
   This document describe the usage of Transport Layer Security (TLS) to
   enhance PCEP security, hence the PCEPS acronym proposed for it.  The
   additional security mechanisms are provided by the transport protocol
   supporting PCEP, and therefore they do not affect the flexibility and
   extensibility of PCEP.

   This document updates RFC 5440 regarding the PCEP initialization
   phase specification.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pceps/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Dhruv Dhody <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 10:02:20 +0530

Hi WG, Chairs,

We have updated the version to avoid expiry.

The document was moved to the standards track 6 months back during the
Berlin meeting. There have been no issues raised.
The document was WG last called and now awaits shepherd review and
write-up. There are no dependencies on other document and can be moved to
the IESG.

Happy 2017!

Regards,
Dhruv

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:43 AM, <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
>

---

From: t.petch <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 10:24:51 +0000

s.1
  the usage of /well-know/well-known/ mechanisms

s.3.6
   In case the initial TLS negotiation or the peer identity check
/fail/fails/

More seriously, the world has a pesky habit of moving on; the fact that
one of  the references is an I-D from 2014 sort of tells the tale.

The UTA working group have worked over the idea of how to start TLS and
RFC7525, RFC7672 and RFC7457 may now be relevant while
draft-elie-nntp-tls-recommendations-03
is the most recent working over of that territory that I know of and I
would regard that as the current standard.  For example, he tackles the
terminology of strict v implicit v mandatory TLS, which the RFC have
muddied the waters on.

So, ready for the IESG in 2015, now I am less clear.

Tom Petch

---

From: "Diego R. Lopez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 11:22:00 +0000

Hi,

It goes without saying we would more than happy to refine the document with updated references (the world moves on, for sure…) and a more precise wording, but as far as I can tell nothing in the document contradicts the UTA work, and I assume we can do this during the shepherding process.

I think it would be a real shame to let the opportunity pass, especially when we are talking of an effort that has pioneered the application of TLS in this kind of protocols.

Be goode,

On 3 Jan 2017, at 11:24 , t.petch <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

s.1

s.3.6

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dhruv Dhody" <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
To: <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 4:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-11.txt

Hi WG, Chairs,

The document was moved to the standards track 6 months back during the
Berlin meeting. There have been no issues raised.
The document was WG last called and now awaits shepherd review and
write-up. There are no dependencies on other document and can be moved
to
the IESG.

Happy 2017!

Regards,
Dhruv

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:43 AM, <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element of the
IETF.

Abstract:
  The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
defines
  the mechanisms for the communication between a Path Computation
  Client (PCC) and a Path Computation Element (PCE), or among PCEs.
  This document describe the usage of Transport Layer Security
(TLS) to
  enhance PCEP security, hence the PCEPS acronym proposed for it.
The
  additional security mechanisms are provided by the transport
protocol
  supporting PCEP, and therefore they do not affect the flexibility
and
  extensibility of PCEP.

[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

--
"Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno"

Dr Diego R. Lopez
Telefonica I+D
http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/

e-mail: [email-masked]
Tel:    +34 913 129 041
Mobile: +34 682 051 091
----------------------------------