Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-28: Discuss
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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Section 5. Write operations (e.g., edit-config) to these data nodes without proper protection can have a negative effect on network operations. There are the subtrees and data nodes and their sensitivity/vulnerability: /ospf:ospf/extended-lsa-support /ospf:ospf/ospf:areas/ospf:area/extended-lsa-support The ability to disable OSPFv3 Extended LSA support can result in a denial of service. Isn’t it more than just denial of service? In certain environments wouldn’t the ability to modify OSPF Extended LSA configurations enable an attacker to: modify network topologies to enable select traffic to avoid inspection or treatment by security controls; route traffic in a way that it would be subject to inspect/modification by an adversary node; or gain access to otherwise segregated parts of the network. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- As an editorial note, I would have benefit from some narrative prose on the data model. _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
