Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-10: 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-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- section 4: Just checking that I've gotten this right. Is the following correct? If RFC7166 is being used then there is never a need to modify packets in a way that would break the authentication. In other words, am I correct that this draft doesn't envisage any middlebox changing an OSPF packet in between the source (of authentication) and destination(s)? If that is correct, then we're good. If that is not correct, then I think more needs to be said in section 4, as it is not at all clear to me how a source could emit a packet that a middlebox could modify, without having to share the symmetric secret used for RFC7166 authentication with that middlebox, which would be fairly clearly undesirable. _______________________________________________ OSPF mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
