Robert, thank you for your review.
And thanks all for your engagement to resolve the issue raised by Robert.
Alissa
> On Apr 7, 2017, at 4:24 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The Gene
Hi Les, Robert and Alvaro,
Thanks for Les' proposed text. I'll update it accordingly.
B.R.
Bing
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjspa...@nostrum.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:36 AM
> To: Alvaro Retana (aretana); Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); Liubing (Leo);
> gen-a
Bing/Robert/Alvaro -
Here is the existing text of the Security Section:
"In general, the use of authentication is incompatible with auto-
configuration as it requires some manual configuration.
For wired deployment, the wired connection itself could be considered
as an implicit authen
Les:
Hi!
The risk is not in the mechanism itself, assuming two routers with the correct
implementation.
The risk is in the fact that a compromised router can craft a packet to force
the auto-config routers to continuously restart. All we’re asking for is a
recognition that the risk exists.
Hi Rober, Alvaro, and Les,
In general, the use of authentication is incompatible with auto-
configuration as it requires some manual configuration.
> -Original Message-
> From: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) [mailto:ginsb...@cisco.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2017 6:44 AM
> To: Alvaro Ret
Alvaro -
Not sure how long we should debate this as the text you are asking for is
modest - but one more attempt on my part - not so much to debate whether to add
text or not - but to come to a common understanding.
> -Original Message-
> From: Alvaro Retana (aretana)
> Sent: Friday, Ap
On 4/7/17, 5:30 PM, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" wrote:
Les:
Hi!
> System-id duplication is a problem for any deployment - not just autoconfig
> deployments. And it will be disruptive in any network until it is resolved.
>
> The only thing autoconfig has added is a way to resolve this w/o manual
Robert -
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjspa...@nostrum.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 2:18 PM
> To: Les Ginsberg (ginsberg); gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org; isis...@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Genart last call review of d
On 4/7/17 3:55 PM, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
Robert -
Thanx for the review.
Reply inline.
-Original Message-
From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjspa...@nostrum.com]
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 1:25 PM
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org; isi
Robert -
Thanx for the review.
Reply inline.
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjspa...@nostrum.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 1:25 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org; isis...@ietf.org
> Subject: Genart last call rev
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review result: Ready with Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For mo
11 matches
Mail list logo
