[Pals] Re: Erik Kline's Discuss on draft-ietf-pals-ple-10 : (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Erik Kline <[email protected]> Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:21:23 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.pwe3 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMGpriU_9o-VWCBuZyqtXt+9bEfqCTHSnc-3787dCarv=gHddA@mail.gmail.com> |
--===============5792387786286360936== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002a25f20627eee719" --0000000000002a25f20627eee719 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just looked at the -10 to -12 diff and it looks great, thank you! cleared my discuss. On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 12:17=E2=80=AFAM Christian Schmutzer (cschmutz) <cs= chmutz=3D [email protected]> wrote: > Thank you Erik, > > I have incorporated the proposed changes in the new version I just > uploaded. Please let me know if there is anything else needed to close yo= ur > review. > > Regards > Christian > > On 25.11.2024, at 22:24, Erik Kline <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 1:55=E2=80=AFAM Christian Schmutzer (cschmutz) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Erik, >> >> Please see my responses inline. Upon your feedback I can upload a new >> draft version with the proposed changes incorporated. >> >> Regards >> Christian >> >> On 24.11.2024, at 00:25, Erik Kline via Datatracker <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-pals-ple-10: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positi= ons/ >> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ple/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-pals-ple-10 >> CC @ekline >> >> * comment syntax: >> - https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md >> >> * "Handling Ballot Positions": >> - >> https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ >> >> ## Discuss >> >> ### S5.1 >> >> * "The next header field of the SRH MUST be set to TBA1." >> >> Technically this should only apply when there are no intervening >> extension >> headers between the SRH and the "upper layer header". >> >> Per RFC 8200 S4.1, there are a fair number of number of extension heade= rs >> that are permitted. >> >> This document may RECOMMEND that there be no extension headers between >> the SRH and the PLE (upper layer) header, but it cannot forbid them (no= t >> without considering updating 8200 and/or 8754). >> >> >> We have followed the wording used in >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8986#section-5.3-2which defines >> a similar function (H.Encaps.L2) with the exact same text. >> > > Oh that it is unfortunate, yes. I only handled the appeal for this > document; I wasn't on the IESG when it came to telechat and I failed to d= o > a review when it was in IETF LC. > > I see your point about this being overly restrictive. And thinking about >> it, I can see cases where someone may in fact apply security measures >> (authentication and encryption) to the PLE VPWS packet stream, which wou= ld >> lead to potentially AH or ESP being present. >> >> The goal of the bullet was to say that the last header being processed >> should have TBA1. Trying to not overcomplicate the text ... does this sm= all >> change do the trick? >> >> OLD "The next header field of the SRH MUST be set to TBA1." >> >> NEW "The next header field of the SRH or last extension header present >> MUST be set to TBA1." >> > > This sounds great! > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> # Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-pals-ple-10 >> CC @ekline >> >> * comment syntax: >> - https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md >> >> * "Handling Ballot Positions": >> - >> https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ >> >> ## Comments >> >> ### S3.1 >> >> * "ICMP - Internet Control Message Protocol [RFC792]" >> >> Since the only use of ICMP in this document is in describing SRv6 Netwo= rk >> Programming SRH processing, the ICMP reference you probably want is >> actually ICMPv6, which is RFC 4443. >> >> >> Good point. I will change to RFC4443 >> >> ### S5.1 >> >> * "The push of the SRH MAY be omitted when the SRv6 policy only >> contains one segment." >> >> You might append "and no optional TLVs in the SRH are desired, e.g. >> HMAC TLV." >> >> This applies to both bullets with identical text. >> >> >> Indeed. I also checked again with RFC 8986 and realised I have trimmed >> the comparable sentence >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8986#section-5.3-3 too much. >> >> How about this change which is even more generic and not specific to HMA= C >> TLV alone? >> >> OLD "The push of the SRH MAY be omitted when the SRv6 policy only >> contains one segment." >> >> NEW "The push of the SRH MAY be omitted when the SRv6 policy only >> contains one segment and there is no need to use any flag, tag, or TLV." >> > > Perfect, thanks. > >> ### S5.2.2 >> >> * "Sequence number ... MUST be ... MAY be ..." >> >> I'm not sure it's a good use of MUST to say something MUST be 'x' but M= AY >> be 'y'. Can this be reworded into a SHOULD or a "MUST follow one the >> following two numbering schemes:"? >> >> >> What about this wording? >> >> OLD >> >> The Sequence number in the RTP header MUST be equal to the sequence >> number in the PLE control word. The sequence number of the RTP header MA= Y >> be used to extend the sequence number of the PLE control word from 16 to= 32 >> bits. If so, the initial value of the RTP sequence number MUST be 0 and >> incremented whenever the PLE control word sequence number cycles through >> from 0xFFFF to 0x0000. >> >> NEW >> >> When using a 16 bit sequence number space, the sequence number in the RT= P >> header MUST be equal to the sequence number in the PLE control word. Whe= n >> using a sequence number space of 32 bit, the initial value of the RTP >> sequence number MUST be 0 and incremented whenever the PLE control word >> sequence number cycles through from 0xFFFF to 0x0000. >> > > I think this is much more clear, thank you. > > I do wonder about how an IW would sync up if it misses some first set of > packets, but ... perhaps I'm misunderstanding or that's for another > discussion in another context. > > Thanks again! > > > --0000000000002a25f20627eee719 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">Just looked at the=C2=A0-10 to -12 diff and it looks great= , thank you!<div><br></div><div>cleared my discuss.</div></div><br><div cla= ss=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Nov 26, 20= 24 at 12:17=E2=80=AFAM Christian Schmutzer (cschmutz) <cschmutz=3D<a hre= f=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>> = wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0= px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> Thank you Erik, <div><br> </div> <div>I have incorporated the proposed changes in the new version I just upl= oaded. Please let me know if there is anything else needed to close your re= view.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Regards</div> <div>Christian=C2=A0<br id=3D"m_-211660183281350039lineBreakAtBeginningOfMe= ssage"> <div><br> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> <div>On 25.11.2024, at 22:24, Erik Kline <<a href=3D"mailto:ek.ietf@gmai= l.com" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:</div> <br> <div><br> <br style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-va= riant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;te= xt-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;text-= decoration:none"> <div class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;fo= nt-style:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:nor= mal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal= ;word-spacing:0px;text-decoration:none"> <div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 1:55=E2=80=AF= AM Christian Schmutzer (cschmutz) <<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]"= target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-= left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div>Hi Erik, <div><br> </div> <div>Please see my responses inline. Upon your feedback I can upload a new = draft version with the proposed changes incorporated.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Regards</div> <div>Christian=C2=A0<br id=3D"m_-211660183281350039m_5157716799769461944lin= eBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"> <div><br> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> <div>On 24.11.2024, at 00:25, Erik Kline via Datatracker <<a href=3D"mai= lto:[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>> wrote:</di= v> <br> <div> <div>Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for<br> draft-ietf-pals-ple-10: Discuss<br> <br> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all<br> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this<br> introductory paragraph, however.)<br> <br> <br> Please refer to<span>=C2=A0</span><a href=3D"https://www.ietf.org/about/gro= ups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/" target=3D"_blank">https://w= ww.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/</a><br> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.<br> <br> <br> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:<br> <a href=3D"https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ple/" target=3D= "_blank">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-ple/</a><br> <br> <br> <br> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br> DISCUSS:<br> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br> <br> Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-pals-ple-10<br> CC @ekline<br> <br> * comment syntax:<br> =C2=A0-<span>=C2=A0</span><a href=3D"https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/= blob/main/format.md" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comment= s/blob/main/format.md</a><br> <br> * "Handling Ballot Positions":<br> =C2=A0-<span>=C2=A0</span><a href=3D"https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/sta= tements/handling-ballot-positions/" target=3D"_blank">https://ietf.org/abou= t/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/</a><br> <br> ## Discuss<br> <br> ### S5.1<br> <br> * "The next header field of the SRH MUST be set to TBA1."<br> <br> =C2=A0Technically this should only apply when there are no intervening exte= nsion<br> =C2=A0headers between the SRH and the "upper layer header".<br> <br> =C2=A0Per RFC 8200 S4.1, there are a fair number of number of extension hea= ders<br> =C2=A0that are permitted.<br> <br> =C2=A0This document may RECOMMEND that there be no extension headers betwee= n<br> =C2=A0the SRH and the PLE (upper layer) header, but it cannot forbid them (= not<br> =C2=A0without considering updating 8200 and/or 8754).<br> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div> <div>We have followed the wording used in<span>=C2=A0</span><a href=3D"http= s://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8986#section-5.3-2" target=3D"_blank">= https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8986#section-5.3-2</a>which define= s a similar function (H.Encaps.L2) with the exact same text.=C2=A0</div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>Oh that it is unfortunate, yes.=C2=A0 I only handled the appeal for th= is document; I wasn't on the IESG when it came to telechat and I failed= to do a review when it was in IETF LC.</div> <div><br> </div> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-= left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> <div> <div> <div> <div>I see your point about this being overly restrictive. And thinking abo= ut it, I can see cases where someone may in fact apply security measures (a= uthentication and encryption) to the PLE VPWS packet stream, which would le= ad to potentially AH or ESP being present.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>The goal of the bullet was to say that the last header being processed= should have TBA1. Trying to not overcomplicate the text ... does this smal= l change do the trick?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>OLD "The next header field of the SRH MUST be set to TBA1."<= /div> <div><br> </div> <div>NEW "The next header field of the SRH or last extension header pr= esent MUST be set to TBA1."</div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>This sounds great!</div> <div><br> </div> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-= left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> <div> <div> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> <div> <div>----------------------------------------------------------------------= <br> COMMENT:<br> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br> <br> # Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-pals-ple-10<br> CC @ekline<br> <br> * comment syntax:<br> =C2=A0-<span>=C2=A0</span><a href=3D"https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/= blob/main/format.md" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comment= s/blob/main/format.md</a><br> <br> * "Handling Ballot Positions":<br> =C2=A0-<span>=C2=A0</span><a href=3D"https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/sta= tements/handling-ballot-positions/" target=3D"_blank">https://ietf.org/abou= t/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/</a><br> <br> ## Comments<br> <br> ### S3.1<br> <br> * "ICMP - Internet Control Message Protocol [RFC792]"<br> <br> =C2=A0Since the only use of ICMP in this document is in describing SRv6 Net= work<br> =C2=A0Programming SRH processing, the ICMP reference you probably want is<b= r> =C2=A0actually ICMPv6, which is RFC 4443.<br> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>Good point. I will change to RFC4443</div> <br> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> <div> <div>### S5.1<br> <br> * "The push of the SRH MAY be omitted when the SRv6 policy only<br> =C2=A0=C2=A0contains one segment."<br> <br> =C2=A0You might append "and no optional TLVs in the SRH are desired, e= .g.<br> =C2=A0HMAC TLV."<br> <br> =C2=A0This applies to both bullets with identical text.<br> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>Indeed. I also checked again with=C2=A0RFC 8986 and realised I have tr= immed the comparable sentence<a href=3D"https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/ht= ml/rfc8986#section-5.3-3" target=3D"_blank">https://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/html/rfc8986#section-5.3-3</a>=C2=A0too much.=C2=A0</div> <div><br> </div> <div>How about this change which is even more generic and not specific to H= MAC TLV alone?</div> <div><br> </div> <div> <div>OLD "The push of the SRH MAY be omitted when the SRv6 policy only= contains one segment."</div> <div><br> </div> <div>NEW "The push of the SRH MAY be omitted when the SRv6 policy only= contains one segment and there is no need to use any flag, tag, or TLV.&qu= ot;</div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>Perfect, thanks.</div> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-= left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> <div> <div> <div> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> <div> <div>### S5.2.2<br> <br> * "Sequence number ... MUST be ... MAY be ..."<br> <br> =C2=A0I'm not sure it's a good use of MUST to say something MUST be= 'x' but MAY<br> =C2=A0be 'y'. Can this be reworded into a SHOULD or a "MUST fo= llow one the<br> =C2=A0following two numbering schemes:"?<br> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>What about this wording?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>OLD</div> <div><br> </div> <div>The Sequence number in the RTP header MUST be equal to the sequence nu= mber in the PLE control word. The sequence number of the RTP header MAY be = used to extend the sequence number of the PLE control word from 16 to 32 bi= ts. If so, the initial value of the RTP sequence number MUST be 0 and incremented whenever the PLE control= word sequence number cycles through from 0xFFFF to 0x0000.</div> <div><br> </div> </div> <div>NEW</div> <div><br> </div> <div>When using a 16 bit sequence number space, the sequence number in the = RTP header MUST be equal to the sequence number in the PLE control word. Wh= en using a sequence number space of 32 bit, the initial value of the RTP se= quence number MUST be 0 and incremented whenever the PLE control word sequence number cycles through from 0xFFFF t= o 0x0000.</div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>I think this is much more clear, thank you.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I do wonder about how an IW would sync up if it misses some first set = of packets, but ... perhaps I'm misunderstanding or that's for anot= her discussion in another context.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Thanks again!</div> </div> </div> </blockquote> </div> <br> </div> </div> </blockquote></div> --0000000000002a25f20627eee719-- --===============5792387786286360936== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KUGFscyBtYWls aW5nIGxpc3QgLS0gcGFsc0BpZXRmLm9yZwpUbyB1bnN1YnNjcmliZSBzZW5kIGFuIGVtYWlsIHRv IHBhbHMtbGVhdmVAaWV0Zi5vcmcK --===============5792387786286360936==--