A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element WG of the IETF.
Title : PCEP Extensions for Establishing Relationships
Between Sets of LSPs
Authors : Ina Minei
Hi Eric,
Let me take one more stab at it -
5. Security Considerations
As described in [RFC5862], P2MP path computation requests are more
CPU-intensive and also utilize more link bandwidth. In the event of
an unauthorized P2MP path computation request, or a denial of service
attac
On 8/31/17 01:34, Dhruv Dhody wrote:
Hi Adam,
-Original Message-
From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Roach
Sent: 30 August 2017 08:20
To: The IESG
Cc: draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006...@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: [Pce] Adam Roach's No Objection on
> On Aug 31, 2017, at 1:32 AM, Dhruv Dhody wrote:
>
> Hi Ben,
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Pce [mailto:pce-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ben Campbell
>> Sent: 29 August 2017 08:18
>> To: The IESG
>> Cc: draft-ietf-pce-rfc6006...@ietf.org; pce@ietf.org; pce-cha...@ietf.org
>> Subj
No, not really. You're still citing to 5440 which has the TCP-MD5 stuff,
and there's no requirement to use AO. I think what's needed here is a
normative requirement for something strong than TCP-MD5. I defer to the WG
on what that should be, but it's really not OK to keep using TCP-MD5 as our
basic
