Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-trill-vendor-channel-00: 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-trill-vendor-channel/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Could you please expand the text in the security considerations section as to why security properties (integrity, authentication, and encryption since they are not part of RBridge Channel messages except when explicitly added on in the extension draft) were not built in? I'm assuming it is the limited scope of use for the protocol. I am glad that options exist to add it in, but wish the text were a bit more encouraging so that would actually happen. Vendors need to be motivated to provide these options for customers who may want to use them, without that motivation, the features won't be provided. _______________________________________________ trill mailing list trill@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
