en this is on a telechat soon, I'd say
better you want for the ballots there to see what's needed.
Cheers,
S.
Thank you,
Linda
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Farrell via Datatracker
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2024 10:30 AM
To: sec...@ietf.org
Cc: bess@ietf.org; draft-ietf
Reviewer: Stephen Farrell
Review result: Has Issues
Draft-20 seems to dial-back the call for BGP/TLS, but OTOH adds text in the
security considerations saying that BGP/TLS "is imperative." I'm not sure of
the security pitfalls that might arise if one followed the guidance here wh
Hi Linda,
...snipping...
On 06/02/2024 18:11, Linda Dunbar wrote:
[Linda] Thank you very much for the suggestion. This draft operates
under the assumption that a secure channel exists between the SD-WAN
controller and the SD-WAN edges.
Right The challenge you seem to face though is the lack
Reviewer: Stephen Farrell
Review result: Has Issues
I looked at the diff from -15 to -19.
I think the main security issue of depending on BGP over TLS remains - that
seems almost fictional (is it?), whereas the shepherd write-up says: "...this
draft is simply describing the usage of exi
Reviewer: Stephen Farrell
Review result: Has Issues
Roman has covered all the points I would have raised in his dicuss ballot
already, so I'm filing this just for completeness and the authors shouldn't
feel any need to respond to me. In particular though, I've no idea if it'
review and comments. Sorry for the delayed response
Resolution to your suggested are inserted below. Revised draft will be posted
next week when the IETF submission opens.
Linda
-Original Message-----
From: Stephen Farrell via Datatracker
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 4:52 PM
To: sec...@ietf.or
Reviewer: Stephen Farrell
Review result: Not Ready
I have two easily fixed issues and one that may need a bit of chat:
#1 There are a few places with (probably wrong) security text that
really would be better fixed. Those include:
- "(such as TLS, SSL, etc.)" occurs a few times, bu
On 10/12/2018 20:41, Heather Flanagan wrote:
> Ekr offered an interesting proposal that would have this kind of
> reference be treated in a fashion similar to IPR declarations.
Not a bad idea. I'd also make it like the downref registry [1]
though, since once we've got a normative reference in on
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-multicast-damping-04: 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
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-pta-flags-02: 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
r adding the text you have
on securing inter-DC traffic,
Cheers,
S.
>
> Best regards,
> Xiaohu
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Xuxiaohu
>> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 5:27 PM
>> To: 'Stephen Farrell'; Alvaro Retana (aretana); Th
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-07: 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
>
> Best regards, Xiaohu
>
>> -Original Message- From: Stephen Farrell
>> [mailto:stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015
>> 5:00 PM To: Xuxiaohu; Alvaro Retana (aretana); The IESG Cc:
>> draft-ietf-bess-virtual-sub...@ietf.org; bess-cha...
On 17/12/15 13:30, Benoit Claise wrote:
> 3) Is security section really a security section? It seems more like
> “do this policy” or this will fail. It should get a stronger review from
> the security directorate
I've not posted a ballot for this one as my question is more
"What does P rea
;s most used there. If not, I'd be glad to know that.)
So, why not include MACsec? Did someone object? If so, why?
(And can you send a pointer to the WG list where that objection
was raised so I can understand it better.)
Thanks,
S.
>
> Best regards, Xiaohu
>
>> -Origin
Hi,
Can someone say why the mention of MACsec wasn't included?
As I understand it, MACsec is what's mostly usable for
inter-DC security so omitting it seems like a bad idea (or
perhaps I'm misinformed)
Thanks,
S.
On 14/12/15 13:34, Alvaro Retana (aretana) wrote:
> Stephen:
>
> Hi!
>
> Xiaohu
Hiya,
On 07/12/15 03:15, Xuxiaohu wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
>> -Original Message- From: Stephen Farrell
>> [mailto:stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie] Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015
>> 7:40 PM To: Xuxiaohu; The IESG Cc:
>> draft-ietf-bess-virtual-sub...@
would still
think that were the statement clearly made elsewhere.
Cheers,
S.
>
> Best regards, Xiaohu
>
>> -Original Message- From: Stephen Farrell
>> [mailto:stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie] Sent: Thursday, December 03,
>> 2015 10:26 PM To: The IESG Cc:
>>
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-virtual-subnet-06: Discuss
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
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-bidir-ingress-replication-03: 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
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-l3vpn-acceptown-community-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
21 matches
Mail list logo
