Author(s),
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
Document: draft-ietf-pim-lasthop-threats-03.txt
Reviewer: Eric Gray
Review Date: 03/27/2008
Summary:
This document is nearly ready to publish as an Informational
RFC.
COMMENTS/QUESTIONS
==================
I don't understand the following statement (from Introduction,
page 3):
"The impact on the outside of the link is described in [RFC4609]."
What is the "outside of the link" in this context?
__________________________________________________________________
In section 2, an attacking node is defined to be either a host or
an unauthorized router. This brings up a point - perhaps it is
necessary to point out that attacks based on subversion of an
authorized router are out of scope (in the Introduction)?
__________________________________________________________________
"Unauthorized" may not be the right word in section 2.2. The text
in the section seems to imply that enabling PIM on a router's host
interface effectively "authorizes" hosts to become PIM neighbors.
Perhaps "Nodes May Exhibit Unauthorized Behavior as PIM Neighbors"
or "Nodes May Be Invalid PIM Neighbors" would be more correct?
__________________________________________________________________
There is a bit of confusion in the bullets in section 3.1 (page 6)
- the lead in appears to assume that bullets apply to an attacker
that has managed to have itself elected as the DR, yet the third
bullet doesn't seem to require this.
I would suggest breaking the bit about "even if the router is not
DR" out into a separate paragraph after the bullets (along the
lines of "Sending PIM Prune messages may also be an effective
attack vector even if the attacking node is not elected DR, since
PIM Prune messages are accepted from (on?) downstream interfaces
even in this case.")
__________________________________________________________________
NITs
====
In section 2.1 "as unicast" or just "unicast" as opposed to "by
unicast"?
("unicast" is not - AFAIK - an active element or agent capable of
sending [Register] messages...)
__________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
