Éric and the rest of the IESG: On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 04:39:27PM +0000, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote: > The IESG telechat of the 9th of January has reviewed [1] > draft-ietf-bfd-large-packets-14 and decided that a revised I-D is required. > The key issue is about the padding, both in the YANG leaf (per Mahesh’s > comment) and in the section 3 about the expected “receiver” behavior (i.e., > check or ignore that the optional padding is full of 0, if no check, then > mention a potential covert channel in the security section). > > This should be an easy update for a revised I-D :-)
Version -15, just uploaded, has addressed the majority of the critical points in the DISCUSSes. Two points from Mahesh linger pending his response: 1. I don't think we should discuss padding contents in the YANG module, and await his justification for why he thinks it belongs in there. 2. While the YANG security considerations boilerplate update request seems otherwise reasonable, the desired format creates a MISREF. This is a more general issue than just this specific document and is unlikely to be an intended side effect. We await his advice on how to reconcile that issue. -- Jeff
