Greetings,

This was an interesting topic and write up. I have a few comments related to 
writing structure and readability.

Original:
While some operators "officially" drop packets that contain IPv6 EHs, it is 
possible that some of the measured packet drops be the result of improper 
configuration defaults, or inappropriate advice in this area.

Suggestion:
While some operators "officially" drop packets that contain IPv6 EHs; it is 
possible that some of the measured packet drops be the result of improper 
configuration defaults, or inappropriate advice in this area.

Original:
The advice in this document is aimed only at transit routers that may
   need to enforce a filtering policy based on the EHs and IPv6 options
   a packet may contain, following a "deny-list" approach, and hence is
   likely to be much more permissive that a filtering policy to be
   employed at e.g. the edge of an enterprise network.  

Suggestion:
The advice in this document is aimed only at transit routers that may
   need to enforce a filtering policy based on the EHs and IPv6 options
   a packet may contain, following a "deny-list" approach, and hence is
   likely to be much more permissive than a filtering policy to be
   employed at, e.g., the edge of an enterprise network.  

Original:
Section 4.2, first paragraph, second sentence
Essentially, packets that contain IPv6 options might need to be processed by an 
IPv6 router's general-purpose CPU,and hence could present a DDoS risk to that 
router's general-purpose CPU (and thus to the router itself).

Suggestion:
Essentially, packets that contain IPv6 options that might need to be processed 
by an IPv6 router's general-purpose CPU and could present a DDoS risk to that 
router's general-purpose CPU.

Comments:
1 - Within the last sentence of the third paragraph within the "Introduction" 
sections. There is a comment about "inappropriate and missing guidelines". Who 
dictates or decides what is inappropriate?
2 - First bullet point in Section 2.3, change "recognise" to "recognize" 
3 - Within the last paragraph of section 2.3, part of the comment ".... it is 
generally desirable that the sender be signaled of the packet drop...." While 
the idea is valid, it might be a good idea to note that such a signal might 
attract malicious attention or threat-actors.
4 - Section 3.4.4.4. It might be best to specify what type of IPSEC deployment 
is involved, host-to-host, site-to-site, site-to-host? 
5 - Section 3.4.5.5. Advise, hasn't AH been depreciated as an insecure 
methodology versus ESP?
  
Thank you for your kind attention,

Michael Dougherty



On 1/19/21, 4:48 PM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 
wrote:


    A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.
    This draft is a work item of the Operational Security Capabilities for IP 
Network Infrastructure WG of the IETF.

            Title           : Recommendations on the Filtering of IPv6 Packets 
Containing IPv6 Extension Headers at Transit Routers
            Authors         : Fernando Gont
                              Will(Shucheng) Liu
        Filename        : draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-07.txt
        Pages           : 37
        Date            : 2021-01-19

    Abstract:
       This document analyzes the security implications of IPv6 Extension
       Headers and associated IPv6 options.  Additionally, it discusses the
       operational and interoperability implications of discarding packets
       based on the IPv6 Extension Headers and IPv6 options they contain.
       Finally, it provides advice on the filtering of such IPv6 packets at
       transit routers for traffic *not* directed to them, for those cases
       where such filtering is deemed as necessary.


    The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering/

    There are also htmlized versions available at:
    https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-07
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-07

    A diff from the previous version is available at:
    https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-eh-filtering-07


    Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
    until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

    Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
    ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/




_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

Reply via email to