Hi Roman, 

Thank you for your comments! Please find the diff and the responses in line 
below. Thank you!

Diff: 
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-12&url2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dhruvdhody/ietf/master/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-13.txt


-----Original Message-----
From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker [mailto:nore...@ietf.org] 
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2021 2:58 AM
To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-control...@ietf.org; 
pce-cha...@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org; Julien Meuric <julien.meu...@orange.com>; 
julien.meu...@orange.com
Subject: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on 
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-12: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-12: 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-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller/



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

Thank you to Yaron Sheffer for the SECDIR review and the updates made as a 
result to improve the Security Considerations.  I endorse the revised text that 
minimally RECOMMENDs the use of “mutually-authenticated and encrypted 
sessions.”  My question is why can’t we go even further and require (use MUST) 
this crucial provisioning channel always be protected.  When would we NOT want 
to use TLS?  I appreciate that mandating the use of security primitives in 
routing is challenging due to a long tail of legacy investment.  However, this 
extension seems like a near "green field" focused on a modern, SDN architecture 
which seems unlikely to have less capable legacy elements.


Shuping> This is a case of blending elements of SDN into the existing 
distributed control plane and devices without necessarily completely replacing 
it and enhancing PCEP as an SBI. It is true that the central control 
instructions allows greater control to label allocation but it is not far from 
what is already done for segment routing label stack (which uses 'RECOMMEND').

Best Regards, 
Shuping 
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

Reply via email to