Re: [bmwg] Version 10, draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance

[[e-mail]]

Thanks Al. These are reasonable suggestions.

 

Is there any additional input we should wait for before posting a new
version?

 

Brian

 

From: MORTON JR., AL <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2021 6:12 PM
To: MORTON JR., AL <[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
[e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; 'Carsten Rossenhoevel' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [bmwg] Version 10, draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance

 

Hi authors and BMWG,

 

Thank you for all efforts to complete the review, comment resolution, and
document revisions!

 

I have completed the "first-pass" document shepherd's review of this draft.

 

I attached and uploaded the current version of the shepherd's review form,
which contains Q&A with some action items for the authors.

 

I want to be sure that the authors considered the "early" Security review
from Kathleen Moriarty:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance-00-secdir
-early-moriarty-2019-07-08/

 

Also, I have a few small suggestions below.

 

Thanks again,

Al

bmwg co-chair

 

We haven't tied the "in-line" terminology to the Figures; I think it would
be good to do that. Many non-benchmarking experts will read this doc in the
coming months (and this is an easy future comment to avoid).

OLD 

3.  Scope

 

   This document provides testing terminology and testing methodology

   for modern and next-generation network security devices that are

   configured in Active ("Inline") mode. 

NEW 

3.  Scope
 
   This document provides testing terminology and testing methodology
   for modern and next-generation network security devices that are
   configured in Active ("Inline", see Figures 1 and 2) mode. 
 
-=-=-=-=-=-
 
In section 4.3.3, the word "balanced\" appears, and the trailing slash needs
to be deleted.
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
 
In section 7.1.1, the sentence beginning
OLD
   Based on customer use case, users can choose...
 
tripped me up, and a few more words will help, I think:
NEW
   Based on the test customer's specific use case, testers can choose...
 
(note that there is only one instance of "customer" in the doc, so we should
make the customer's role clear here)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
 
 
 

 

 

From: bmwg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> > On Behalf
Of MORTON JR., AL
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2021 12:54 PM
To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> ; [e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]> 
Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Version 10, draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance

 

***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T ***
Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information.

BMWG,

 

Those who have submitted comments on recent versions (8,9) should check the
diffs now.

Please confirm that your comments have been addressed in version 10, by
e-mail, ASAP.

 

thanks,

Al

bmwg co-chair

 

From: bmwg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> > On Behalf
Of [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2021 10:31 AM
To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> 
Subject: [bmwg] Version 10, draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance

 

Folks,

 

An update to draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance has been posted. I believe the
next step is WG Chair review.

 

Version 10 has gone through multiple reviews . As a result, we have
corrected a number of typos and grammatical errors. Additionally, we
clarified wording in a few spots. The following has also been changed as a
result of comments/discussions from/with Sarah Banks. (Sarah, thank you.)

*	Removed NGIDS from the draft
*	Added the following text in section 3 for "Inline" mode and
"Fail-open" clarification: " This document provides testing terminology and
testing methodology for modern and next-generation network security devices
that are configured in Active ("Inline") mode."
*	Also, we added the following text in section 4.2:  "DUT/SUT MUST be
configured in "Inline" mode so that the traffic is actively inspected by the
DUT/SUT.  Also "Fail-Open" behavior MUST be disabled on the DUT/SUT."
*	Added more clarification for the parameters and values defined in
section "4.3.1.  Client Configuration": This section specifies which
parameters SHOULD be considered while configuring clients using test
equipment.  Also, this section specifies the RECOMMENDED values for certain
parameters.  The values are the defaults used in most of the client
operating systems currently.
*	Rephrased section 5 " Testbed Consideration". Added recommended
steps for reference test.
*	Explained the usage of the parameter "Initial throughput": "Initial
throughput is not a KPI to report.  This value is configured on the traffic
generator and used to perform Step 1: "Test Initialization and
Qualification" described under the Section 7.1.4."

Brian

 

---------

Brian Monkman

Executive Director, NetSecOPEN

Office: [phone] 

Fax: [phone]

Mobile: [phone]

 



https://www.netsecopen.org
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.netsecopen.org__;!!BhdT!wpaM8GOInxvN
JdztL0uqXkYCL1UWmjmmAASp8hiMJEKN0JgjzEyGqz2m7207$>