Re: Evaluation: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh - Generalized Mu ltiprotocol Label Switching Extensions for SONET and SDH Control to Prop o sed Standard

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B1550115755E@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.c
om>, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" writes:
>Steve, you are holding a DISCUSS that you still have to 
>either write-up or give up. Below the pointers I gave you.
>
>The abllot:
>http://www.ietf.org/IESG/EVALUATIONS/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh.bal
>
>Do you think you can find the time to at least get me a writeup
>so that I can get the authors some feedback as to why their
>document was not approved. They have asked me a few times
>already.

I just reread the spec.  From the little I understood, I see no
security issue in it.  There may be a problem with the base GMPLS specs,
but I didn't go back to those; in any event, it seems inappropriate to
block this relatively-innocuous document because of concerns about the
base spec.  I wasn't the one who raised the initial concern about this
document, so I don't remember what the base issue may have been; does
anyone else have anything specific to point to?  If not, I'm going to
clear my DISCUSS.  (My apologies if I sound a bit grumpy.  I'm not only
seriously short on sleep, I'm on a train that has been stalled (with no
progress in sight) for the last 100 (U.S.) minutes because of "a fatality
on the tracks".  The lights are off, the ventilation is off, laptop power
is off, and I don't have a wireless modem that will let me
get to the ballot web site.)