Hi Donald, Thanks for the proposed text. Please see inline.
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:01 PM, Donald Eastlake <d3e...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Kathleen, > > Would the following replacement Security Considerations section for > draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls be adequate? > > > This document specifies methods using existing standards and > facilities in ways that do not create new security problems. > > For general VPLS security considerations, including discussion of > isolating customers from each other, see [RFC4761] and [RFC4762]. > > For transport of TRILL by Pseudowires security consideration, see > [RFC7173]. In particular, since pseudowires are support by MPLS or IP > which are in turn supported by a link layer, that document recommends > using IP security or the lower link layer security. > > For added security against the compromise of data end-to-end > encryption and authentication should be considered; that is, > encryption and authentication from source end station to destination > end station. Would this be accomplished through IPsec? If encryption and authentication are not employed, what are the risks to tenant isolation since this draft joins TRILL campuses? I think there should be text that explains this risk in addition to the text already proposed. Thanks, Kathleen > > For general TRILL security considerations, see [RFC6325]. > > > Thanks, > Donald > =============================== > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA > d3e...@gmail.com > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Andrew G. Malis <agma...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Kathleen, >> >> I don’t want to speak for the authors. However, I did contribute to this >> draft (although not this specific section). So that said, here’s my two >> cents …. >> >> I agree that first sentence could have been worded better, but the bottom >> line is that depending on the model used, the security considerations for >> RFC 7173, 4761, or 4762 applies, including the discussions in those RFCs on >> issues such as isolation and end-to-end security. Those RFCs are referenced >> in the security section. So the substance is already there, perhaps the >> draft just needs better pointers to it. >> >> Cheers, >> Andy >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Kathleen Moriarty >> <kathleen.moriarty.i...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for >>> draft-ietf-trill-transport-over-mpls-07: 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-trill-transport-over-mpls/ >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> DISCUSS: >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> I was very surprised to see the following in the security considerations >>> section and would like to work with you on improvements. >>> As an informational document specifying methods that use only >>> existing standards and facilities, this document has no effect on >>> security. >>> >>> Having watched many TRILL documents go by in the last 4 years, we didn't >>> push >>> too hard on security in some cases as a result of the restriction to a >>> campus >>> network. This particular document extends into multi-tenancy where there >>> are >>> certainly security considerations introduced to be able to provide >>> isolation >>> properties. MPLS offers no security and it is being used to join TRILL >>> campuses as described int his draft. This is done without any >>> requirement of >>> an overlay protocol to provide security - why is that the case? >>> Minimally, the >>> considerations need to be explained. Ideally, a solution should be >>> offered to >>> protect tenants when TRILL campuses are joined. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> trill mailing list >>> trill@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill >> >> > -- Best regards, Kathleen _______________________________________________ trill mailing list trill@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill
