[BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
"Benoit Claise" <bclaise@cisco.com> Mon, 08 June 2015 13:41 UTC
Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF21A1A8798; Mon, 8 Jun 2015 06:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0C9YB-JZbgiu; Mon, 8 Jun 2015 06:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 665ED1A878B; Mon, 8 Jun 2015 06:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.0.3.p2
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20150608134117.30091.62236.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 06:41:17 -0700
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/behave/H-YWVE_W-QPFtwqKS8WIFURk_fE>
Cc: simon.perreault@viagenie.ca, behave@ietf.org, tina.tsou.zouting@huawei.com, jouni.nospam@gmail.com, Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com
Subject: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave/>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 13:41:19 -0000
Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for draft-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1-01: 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/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-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This ballot is based on version 1 (I understand that v2 is on its way, waiting for the secretariat to post) - Before deprecating the following textual conventions, have you checked that they are not used in any MIB modules? NatProtocolType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "A list of protocols that support the network address translation. Inclusion of the values is not intended to imply that those protocols need to be supported. Any change in this TEXTUAL-CONVENTION should also be reflected in the definition of NatProtocolMap, which is a BITS representation of this." SYNTAX INTEGER { none (1), -- not specified other (2), -- none of the following icmp (3), udp (4), tcp (5) } NatProtocolMap ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "A bitmap of protocol identifiers that support the network address translation. Any change in this TEXTUAL-CONVENTION should also be reflected in the definition of NatProtocolType." SYNTAX BITS { other (0), icmp (1), udp (2), tcp (3) } NatAddrMapId ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "A unique id that is assigned to each address map by a NAT enabled device." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295) NatBindIdOrZero ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "A unique id that is assigned to each bind by a NAT enabled device. The bind id will be zero in the case of a Symmetric NAT." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..4294967295) NatBindId ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "A unique id that is assigned to each bind by a NAT enabled device." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295) NatSessionId ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "A unique id that is assigned to each session by a NAT enabled device." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295) NatBindMode ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "An indication of whether the bind is an address bind or an address port bind." SYNTAX INTEGER { addressBind (1), addressPortBind (2) } NatAssociationType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "An indication of whether the association is static or dynamic." SYNTAX INTEGER { static (1), dynamic (2) } NatTranslationEntity ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS deprecated DESCRIPTION "An indication of a) the direction of a session for which an address map entry, address bind or port bind is applicable, and b) the entity (source or destination) within the session that is subject to translation." SYNTAX BITS { inboundSrcEndPoint (0), outboundDstEndPoint(1), inboundDstEndPoint (2), outboundSrcEndPoint(3) } This is currently in discussion with the MIB doctors (draft authors are copied) At the very minimum, a note in an "operations considerations" section, explaining the implications of removing TCs, is required - This point above is in line with Jouni's feedback. * There is also no text about operational and management implications related to deprecation process of the old MIB and migrating to the new (to be approved) NAT-MIB-v2). - Let me check something. As noted by Jouni in his OPS-DIR review, The smilint reports the following warnings: * mibs/NAT-MIB:15: [5] {import-unused} warning: identifier `DisplayString' imported from module `SNMPv2-TC' is never used * mibs/NAT-MIB:27: [5] {import-unused} warning: identifier `InterfaceIndex' imported from module `IF-MIB' is never used * mibs/NAT-MIB:33: [5] {import-unused} warning: identifier `InetAddressPrefixLength' imported from module `INET-ADDRESS-MIB' is never used * mibs/NAT-MIB:36: [5] {import-unused} warning: identifier `VPNIdOrZero' imported from module `VPN-TC-STD-MIB' is never used My first reaction: it's normal because some objects are now deprecated (so not used any longer). After some analysis ... When comparing the imports lines from RFC4008 and the ones from this draft, those 4 lines magically appeared in this draft. Why? This asks the question: have you actually started your work from the MIB module extracted from RFC4008? I started to file a DISCUSS on that very point. However, I was so bothered by this difference that I actually compared the MIB modules extracted from this draft and from RFC4008. I see two occurences of this change: InetAddress (SIZE (4|16) versus InetAddress Why? Also, I wanted to check this condition in RFC4181: - On the other hand, the module name MUST NOT be changed (except to correct typographical errors), existing definitions (even obsolete ones) MUST NOT be removed from the MIB module, and descriptors and OBJECT IDENTIFIER values associated with existing definitions MUST NOT be changed or re-assigned. A word expressing that all RFC 4008 MIB objects are included in this version, but with only the STATUS changed to deprecated would be helpful. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - A point mentioned by Jouni that might be elevated to a DISCUSS (I let the security ADs decide): * The Security Considerations does not really discuss the security implications of the _deprecation_ itself e.g. there is going to be boxes out there that use the old MIB and others that use the new (to be approved) MIB and what that mixed environment might entail. There is some text that is getting to that direction (SNMPv2 and SNMPv3 security differences). * Since the new MIB is kind of requirement for replacing this old to be deprecated MIB, I would assume the draft-ietf-behave-nat-mib-v2 to be a _normative_ reference in this document. EDITORIAL * change the copyright date to 2015 * Unused Reference: 'RFC4787' is defined, but no reference was found in the text. * SNMP acronym is the first time used in Section 1 unexpaned. The acronym is expanded later in Section 2. Expand it already in Section 1.
- [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-perraul… Benoit Claise
- [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-perraul… Benoit Claise
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… ietfdbh
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Benoit Claise
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Tom Taylor
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Benoit Claise
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Tom Taylor
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Benoit Claise
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Benoit Claise
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Tom Taylor
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Tom Taylor
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Tom Taylor
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… ietfdbh
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… ietfdbh
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Tom Taylor
- Re: [BEHAVE] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-per… Spencer Dawkins at IETF