Subject: [sfc] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-sfc-architecture-09: (with COMMENT)

From: "Kathleen Moriarty" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2015 18:29:04 -0700

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sfc-architecture-09: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-architecture/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for adding text to address my previous discuss:
1. The Security Considerations section only talks about privacy of the
SFC information for classification.  The more important point may be the
privacy of any data gathered from a payload used for the classification
and this needs to be mentioned.

Comments:

1. For the Service Functions, I would think you would want to leave out
"Lawful Intercept" as a device type since it's not a universal
requirement on networks and immediately raises privacy concerns.

2. Section 3, #3
Classification on part of the packet payload will become increasingly
more difficult as encryption is rolled out.  The IETF and IAB both
support the increased use of encryption for privacy and security purposes
and are looking to have it end-to-end where possible.  With the work out
of TCPInc, encryption will be even more prevalent.