More comments from Franz Kastenholz - fkastenholz@xxxxxxxxxxx (frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) 1) if i read this right, it is a way for one lsr to ask another lsr to test the first lsr's data path -- "can someone tell me if i am working ok?". _if_ my interpretation is right (and it is monday morning and not all the little gray cells are at 100% efficiency yet), it seems that this is a fundamentally stupid thing that the ietf should be standardizing, etc. 2) regardless of point 1, it looks like there are various bits of processing that have to happen here; but there is no talk about metering/prioritizing/etcing this traffic, leaving open a potential dos avenue. the security considerations section seems to hint at this (recommending that loopback labels be shared among trusted neighbors only). aside, this last comment _also_ opens a huge can of worms; who is trusted? how do i know? what filtering/etcing is needed to make the right things happen? f -----Original Message----- From: The IESG [mailto:iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 6:04 PM To: IETF-Announce Cc: mpls@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Last Call: 'Label Switching Router Self-Test' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-self-test) The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG to consider the following document: - 'Label Switching Router Self-Test ' <draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-self-test-06.txt> as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the iesg@xxxxxxxx or ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2006-09-08. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-self-test-06.txt _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf