Subject: [spring] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop-13: (with COMMENT)

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 08:30:44 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop-13: No Objection

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-spring-segment-routing-ldp-interop/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

As a non-specialist I found the organization of 3.2, 3.2.1, and 3.2.2 a little
hard to follow, as it seemed to me like the SRMS section should have been
introduced first before the discussion of the SR to LDP flow and behavior.

Section 7 says:

"The security associated with these advertisement is
   part of the security applied to routing protocols such as IS-IS
   [RFC5304] and OSPF [RFC5709] which both make use of cryptographic
   authentication mechanisms."

Unless the use of the cited cryptographic authentication mechanisms is required
when using these label advertisements, I would suggest saying "which both
optionally make use of." Otherwise this seems a little misleading.