RE: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-02.txt

[Jonathan Lang <jplang@calient.net>]

Bert,
  Thanks for pointing this out.  We have already started working on this as
can be seen by the recent contribution by Alex Zinin on LMP Security. 

Thanks,
Jonathan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:55 AM
> To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-02.txt
> 
> 
> From Kireeti's "wg document status" email
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net]
> > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 2:52 AM
> > To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> > Subject: WG dcoument status
> > 
> > 
> > Here's a status update.
> > 
> ... snip ...
> 
> > The LMP draft:
> > 	draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-02.txt
> > has gone through one round of WG Last Call comments and, once a
> > new version has been produced incorporating these comments, will
> > go through a final WG Last Call.  This is also targeted as a
> > Proposed Standard.
> > 
> I will note that in my view, the security section will need
> serious work. I doubt that the Security ADs will sign off on the
> current text. The security section should address the risks
> and treats. It should then specify how to protect against them.
> A text like "LMP exchanges may be authenticated with MD5" (which
> is basically what you write now) seems not sufficient to me.
> 
> Bert
>