Hi Joseph, Thanks for the review, see below.
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> wrote: > Reviewer: Joseph Salowey > Review result: Has Issues > > I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's > ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the > IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the > security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat > these comments just like any other last call comments. > > Document is ready with issues. > > I think the document has appropriate security considerations. > > One issue I see in the document is that in the intro it states: > "The basic idea is that all ingress RBridges send BUM traffic to a > centralized > node, which SHOULD be a distribution tree root, using unicast TRILL > encapsulation." In section 3 it states : "The centralized node MUST be a > distribution tree root." > > The MUST and SHOULD seem to be at odds here. > Indeed, a number of "SHOULD"s were changed in a recent revision to "MUST"s and it looks like one of the most prominent, in the Abstract, was overlooked. Thanks, Donald (document shepherd) =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA [email protected]
_______________________________________________ trill mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
