The proposed text resolved my discuss. I will clear on the assumption it
will make it in.
Thanks!
Ben.
On 15 Mar 2017, at 5:30, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Ben,
Please see the text proposed to address Mirja's Comment.
Thanks,
Adrian
-----Original Message-----
From: Pce [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Campbell
Sent: 15 March 2017 01:06
To: The IESG
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: [Pce] Ben Campbell's Discuss on
draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext-12:
(with
DISCUSS)
Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pce-inter-layer-ext-12: 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/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-pce-inter-layer-ext/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If I am reading things correctly, the security considerations just
say
the extensions in this draft may raise new security considerations,
but
doesn't say anything about what they might be. That's an incomplete
analysis. What new considerations actually (not "may") exist? What
potential attacks may be enabled by these extensions, if any? Are
there
things people can do to mitigate them?
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
