Dear Suresh,
Having the warnings in the draft is good but having a pointer to a document
including a fair and detailed risk analysis is also valuable and worth to be
acknowledged.
Having that pointer is an "invitation" to people who will deploy this mechanism
(I know some of them who are planning to) to assess the validity of the claimed
threats (and also to consider the alternatives listed in Section 3 of
draft-dec-*). This is even encouraged given the intended track: "experimental".
Thanks.
Cheers,
Med
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Suresh Krishnan [mailto:suresh(_dot_)krishnan(_at_)ericsson(_dot_)com]
Envoyé : vendredi 8 juin 2012 22:14
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP
Cc : ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ipv6(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; DUREL Sophie
OLNC/NAD/TIP
Objet : Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-lineid-05.txt> (The
Line Identification Destination Option) to Experimental RFC
Hi Med,
On 06/06/2012 08:04 AM, mohamed(_dot_)boucadair(_at_)orange(_dot_)com wrote:
Dear Suresh, all,
Even if the document includes several warnings about the
unreliability of an RS-based mechanism, I suggest to add a
pointer to the following document:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dec-6man-rs-access-harmful-00.
Is there something in particular that you think is missing from the
lineid draft? The current warning text in lineid (and the
reclassification to experimental) was arrived at after consultations
with the the 6man chairs and the author of draft-dec.
Thanks
Suresh