Thank you very much for reviewing.
Please see in-line with [JORGE].

-----Original Message-----
From: Mirja Kühlewind <i...@kuehlewind.net>
Date: Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 12:16 PM
To: The IESG <i...@ietf.org>
Cc: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framew...@ietf.org" 
<draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framew...@ietf.org>, Stephane Litkowski 
<stephane.litkow...@orange.com>, "bess-cha...@ietf.org" <bess-cha...@ietf.org>, 
"stephane.litkow...@orange.com" <stephane.litkow...@orange.com>, 
"bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
Subject: Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on 
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-07: (with COMMENT)
Resent-From: <alias-boun...@ietf.org>
Resent-To: <jorge.raba...@nokia.com>, <satya...@cisco.com>, 
<saja...@cisco.com>, <jdr...@juniper.net>, <kiran.naga...@nokia.com>, 
Resent-Date: Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 12:16 PM

    Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
    draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-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 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:
    First one minor editorial comment:
    Sec 3.2 "Otherwise if even a single advertisement for the type-4 route is
           not received with the locally configured DF Alg and capability,
           the Default DF Election algorithm (modulus) algorithm MUST be
           used as in [RFC7432]."
    I believe you meant a single advertisement is received without the 
    DF Alg and capability (or a different one I guess), and not that the
    advertisement is not received at all (because that might be hard to check),
    right? Maybe you can rephrase this sentence a bit to make the intention more
[JORGE] we changed it to the following:
" - Otherwise if even a single advertisement for the type-4 route is received 
without the locally configured DF Alg and capability, the Default DF 
    However, think about this further, I wondering if there is something here 
    such be discussed in the security considerations, e.g. how easy would it be 
    an attacker to disturb the algo selection and cause a fallback to the 
[JORGE] yep, good point. We added this in the security section, also based on 
the comments from another reviewer:
"Note that the network will not benefit of the new procedures if the DF 
Election Alg is not consistently configured on all the PEs in the ES (if there 
is no unanimity among all the PEs, the DF Election Alg falls back to the 
Default [RFC7432] DF Election)."


BESS mailing list

Reply via email to