Hello Med,

the change is pushed to the repo and will be in the next iteration.

Talking of that: Which next steps do you see to move this document
forward?

With best regards,
Tobias

On Tue, 2025-10-07 at 12:28 +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi Tobias, 
> 
> I suggest this change:
> 
> OLD: this document replaces RFC7454 / BCP194
> NEW: this document obsoletes RFC 7454
> 
> The reason is that your document, although obsoleting 7454, will be
> published under the umbrella of BCP 194.
> 
> No need to release a new revision to fix this. This can be queued
> till you have other comments. Thank you.
> 
> Cheers,
> Med
> 
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Tobias Fiebig <[email protected]>
> > Envoyé : mardi 7 octobre 2025 13:28
> > À : [email protected]
> > Objet : [GROW] Re: draft-ietf-grow-bgpopsecupd-09 early Intdir
> > review
> > 
> > 
> > Moin,
> > 
> > I just re-added the text. Can you gave it a quick read and check
> > if that works?
> > 
> > With best regards,
> > Tobias
> > 
> > On Mon, 2025-10-06 at 06:34 +0000, [email protected]
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Florian,
> > > 
> > > Keeping the "full note" is subjective as some prefer to have
> > some
> > > context about what is updated/replaced in the abstract itself
> > while
> > > others prefer to see that in the main text.
> > > 
> > > I'm personally neutral on this.
> > > 
> > > Thank you.
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > Med
> > > 
> > > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > > De : [email protected] <[email protected]>
> > Envoyé :
> > > > lundi 6 octobre 2025 08:06 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET
> > > > <[email protected]> Cc : [email protected];
> > > > [email protected]; draft-ietf-grow- [email protected];
> > > > [email protected] Objet : Re: [GROW] Re: draft-ietf-grow-
> > bgpopsecupd-09
> > > > early Intdir review
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > oops, my fault. I had never noticed / wasn't aware.
> > > > I guess a sentence "This RFC obsoletes XYZ" is enough, or do
> > you
> > > > want the whole commentary back? It was the commentary that led
> > to my
> > > > comment...
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Florian
> > > > --
> > > > Sent from a small device. Please excuse interesting auto-
> > correct.
> > > > 
> > > > 6 Oct 2025 07:47:58 [email protected]:
> > > > 
> > > > > Hi Tobias/Florian,
> > > > > 
> > > > > On this one:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > Abstract
> > > > > > > --------
> > > > > > > I was surprised to read commentary on how this document
> > > > changes
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > document it obsoletes in the abstract. Maybe the 2nd
> > paragraph
> > > > > > > ("Previously, security considerations for BGP have been
> > > > > > described
> > > > > > > in...") can be moved to an appendix. I'm also used to
> > checking
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > header of RFC to see if they update or obsolete other
> > RFC, so
> > > > I
> > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > have a need for this information in the abstract.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm afraid some changes in the abstract will need to be
> > > > reverted. At
> > > > > least we need a mention that the document obsoletes RFC7454.
> > > > Please
> > > > > see the checks at:
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > > > auth
> > > > > or-
> > > > 
> > tools.ietf.org%2Fapi%2Fidnits%3Furl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2
> > > > F
> > > > > archive%2Fid%2Fdraft-ietf-grow-bgpopsecupd-
> > > > 10.txt&data=05%7C02%7Cmoham
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > ed.boucadair%40orange.com%7Ce721dc188c56457320f208de049e6bca%7C90c
> > > > 7a20
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C638953275641794000%7CUnknown%7
> > > > CTWF
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > pbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zM
> > > > iIsI
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > kFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nOS1Iiyf%2FhZU3
> > > > 7aw%
> > > > > 2Fyz%2F7AD7LrD0lJG7C7OqZcWEgBc%3D&reserved=0
> > > > > 
> > > > > FWIW, this guidance is provided in draft-rpc-rfc7322bis,
> > > > specifically this part:
> > > > > 
> > > > >    Every RFC must have an Abstract that provides a concise
> > and
> > > > >    comprehensive overview of the purpose and contents of the
> > > > entire
> > > > >    document, to give a technically knowledgeable reader a
> > > > general
> > > > >    overview of the function of the document and some context
> > > > with
> > > > >    regards to its relationship (in particular, whether it
> > > > updates or
> > > > 
> > >    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > ^^^^^
> > > > >    obsoletes) any other RFCs.  In addition to its function
> > in
> > > > the RFC
> > > > >    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > >    itself, the Abstract section text will appear in
> > publication
> > > > >    announcements and in the online index of RFCs.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thank you.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Med
> > > > > 
> > > > > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > > > > De : Tobias Fiebig <[email protected]> Envoyé :
> > samedi 4
> > > > octobre
> > > > > > 2025 16:23 À : Florian Obser <[email protected]>;
> > > > > > [email protected] Cc : draft-ietf-grow-
> > [email protected];
> > > > > > [email protected] Objet : [GROW] Re: draft-ietf-grow-
> > bgpopsecupd-09
> > > > early
> > > > > > Intdir review
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Hello Florian,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > thank you for taking the time to review the document.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I am marking the document as ready. Overall the draft is
> > well
> > > > > > written
> > > > > > > and gives a concise introduction to BGP security without
> > going
> > > > > > off
> > > > > > > into the weeds.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I'll note some oddities that I spotted while reading the
> > > > > > document with
> > > > > > > fresh eyes. Feel free to address these or ignore as you
> > see
> > > > fit.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thank you, this is good to hear. I outline below how we
> > > > addressed
> > > > > > your comments and uploaded -10 with these comments
> > addressed.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Please find the diff here:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > https://fra01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > > > > > author-tools.ietf.org%2Fiddiff%3Furl1%3Ddraft-ietf-grow-
> > > > > > bgpopsecupd-09%26url2%3Ddraft-ietf-grow-bgpopsecupd-
> > > > > > 10%26difftype%3D--
> > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > html&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C6c4ff5c4f52c4
> > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > 8570dfd08de0351c206%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C6
> > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > 38951846989866402%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUs
> > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > IlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%
> > > > > > 
> > > > 
> > 3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RACFE8EKVtJLoJBgwILvfyTsyJvhpHlAGMJ2fTWVEGs%
> > > > > > 3D&reserved=0
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Title
> > > > > > > -----
> > > > > > > "Updated BGP Operations and Security" that's probably
> > not
> > > > going
> > > > > > to age
> > > > > > > well, if someone wishes to update this document 10 years
> > from
> > > > > > now,
> > > > > > > will its title be "Updated Updated BGP Operations and
> > > > Security"?
> > > > > > > Maybe change it to "BGP Operations and Security", I
> > don't
> > > > think
> > > > > > RFC
> > > > > > > titles need to be unique.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This is an artifact from the initial working title. The
> > > > > > recommendation has been implemented.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Abstract
> > > > > > > --------
> > > > > > > I was surprised to read commentary on how this document
> > > > changes
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > document it obsoletes in the abstract. Maybe the 2nd
> > paragraph
> > > > > > > ("Previously, security considerations for BGP have been
> > > > > > described
> > > > > > > in...") can be moved to an appendix. I'm also used to
> > checking
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > header of RFC to see if they update or obsolete other
> > RFC, so
> > > > I
> > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > have a need for this information in the abstract.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > If this is done, the 3rd paragraph does not fit any
> > more. It
> > > > > > could be
> > > > > > > moved to the end of the introduction, slightly changed:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Remove "To this end, the document describes the security
> > > > > > requirements
> > > > > > > and..." from the abstract and add
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > The document explicitly does not focus on specific
> > technical
> > > > > > > > implementations and requirements.  Operators are
> > advised to
> > > > > > consult
> > > > > > > > documentation and contemporary informational documents
> > > > > > concerning
> > > > > > > > methods to ensure that these properties are
> > sufficiently
> > > > > > ensured in
> > > > > > > > their network.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > at the end of the introduction.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I partially integrated this, reducing the text to the
> > initial
> > > > > > summarizing part, while including the point you mentioned
> > at
> > > > the end
> > > > > > of the introduction as well. This creates a slight text
> > > > duplication;
> > > > > > However, given the abstract's purpose, I would argue that
> > the
> > > > > > doubling of text there is a reasonable trade-off.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 3.  Protection of the BGP Speaker and Session
> > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > "The BGP speaker, i.e., the host running BGP..." maybe
> > I'm
> > > > > > tainted by
> > > > > > > IPv6 terminology, but I find the term "host" strange. A
> > host
> > > > is
> > > > > > a node
> > > > > > > that does not forward traffic. A BGP speaker might very
> > well
> > > > > > forward
> > > > > > > traffic, so maybe "node" is a better term. Otoh I've
> > only ever
> > > > > > used
> > > > > > > the term BGP speaker myself...
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > This is an interesting point; After some thought about it,
> > I
> > > > tend to
> > > > > > agree. I hence exchange the two occurrences of 'host' with
> > > > 'node'.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > With best regards,
> > > > > > Tobias
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > My working day may not be your working day. Please do not
> > feel
> > > > > > obliged to reply to my email outside of your normal
> > working
> > > > hours.
> > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > -----
> > > > --
> > > > > > Tobias Fiebig, Forschungsgruppe Internet Architecture
> > (INET)
> > > > Max-
> > > > > > Planck-Institut für Informatik, Campus E14, 66123
> > Saarbrücken
> > > > > > E1 4 - Raum 517 mobil: +31 616 80 98 99
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > > > ____
> > > > > ______________________________________
> > > > > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des
> > > > informations
> > > > > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre
> > > > diffuses,
> > > > > exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
> > > > message
> > > > > par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le
> > detruire
> > > > ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant
> > > > susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite
> > si ce
> > > > message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or
> > > > > privileged information that may be protected by law; they
> > should
> > > > not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> > > > > If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> > > > sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> > > > > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages
> > that
> > > > have been modified, changed or falsified.
> > > > > Thank you.
> > > 
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > ___
> > > _______________________________________
> > > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des
> > informations
> > > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre
> > diffuses,
> > > exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
> > message
> > > par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire
> > ainsi
> > > que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant
> > susceptibles
> > > d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message
> > a ete
> > > altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> > > 
> > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or
> > > privileged information that may be protected by law; they should
> > not
> > > be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> > > If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> > sender and
> > > delete this message and its attachments.
> > > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that
> > have
> > > been modified, changed or falsified.
> > > Thank you.
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> > 
> > --
> > Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig
> > T +31 616 80 98 99
> > M [email protected]
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> _____________________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous
> avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les
> messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere,
> deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> 
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or
> privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender
> and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have
> been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.

-- 
Dr.-Ing. Tobias Fiebig
T +31 616 80 98 99
M [email protected]

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to