Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-05
"Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com> Wed, 13 May 2020 01:14 UTC
Return-Path: <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 741523A0AE0 for <i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 May 2020 18:14:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.087
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.087 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HK_NAME_FM_MR_MRS=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 oTJBLkhEzftb for <i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 May 2020 18:14:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22c.google.com (mail-lj1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 173763A0ADD for <i2nsf@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 May 2020 18:14:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id g1so9923419ljk.7 for <i2nsf@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 May 2020 18:14:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oUB9GjVPRE+JuIEZY6cLDQaxVKrZSh1X+72z1D0BwMk=; b=g/DJJ+XRrsaEwH5YPzWzucHjcVd3Afj3ReyyLDPDU6jQC5tul/FcXb+CEerlGOpXoS djqmMbZFWJW1lUOL9rn49D+WgMaVYpvXIGPhLTUBG5UHHpkdGnD1amnufzhn6+NLjY9e qxvf1nW7l46E+m0UFZXF5iBOpp3UAKOPWvdvX/p85SL441VNXSWPfiDBZvDhH+28Hu9R a/IMz+6LbYth/hLRqlZjmjkuOTlOdIwvmsiR458MS4IBWPkvju8vtIDG8oWOb2SlnqHD pAb7Vq9C5Ki5NDjfW/xt+NTNmqgEwx6g9Q1ix5XajXDJy4itQK3Te3hO3PrzN9Vfd1mh QWOw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oUB9GjVPRE+JuIEZY6cLDQaxVKrZSh1X+72z1D0BwMk=; b=lhYT65Dn7GPOeVBa0ucaq2ZN3d5xHzUkkacHJ1j0lxsNcveRZcd2f3pywd0lU0LJhi c8aG9jvDe2zx617dEhTsLEg9M6G+rkLPPJJdVtgjQy/3n9sCoBK8S+8GLUMseFtak+8v S2AsGQOwBai0kuSl1paWClicvwb4fP3oxHCMhbGyxFuV/9tWSJF7MWIA+8ySS6zJUh4r mHEbHtnoAqlknfW5ep5EfsV9eEWdyd5RlGKLq/H1Y7cThV+YckH8mFITaQ/R3KJTjlrA XBsOAWApau4qvrALDdIxgneIxg3mucNWuJC9i9FVqBjJuDcsYDWz2mo8mzD8IfPkIO2v QRaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531VhcAst/VQn92K4sl6lRSmPRb5ek1CbqoZJ0pNSG5sD6Dl8rQu Qamly7D6KxYdxjREbt3F85q6GZRN7r34Wkxb/hc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwY1ufLcbdktxsxTslUdcRktNsZjYRZgrc7DnGDxW9CeCu5nv62S4DUQ9oYnLPbcnBKtf6QnpP2CmyK9YBQ2cs=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8017:: with SMTP id j23mr14484328ljg.22.1589332484091; Tue, 12 May 2020 18:14:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <475d6c2be4a7447dba48a4529451b72f@cert.org>
In-Reply-To: <475d6c2be4a7447dba48a4529451b72f@cert.org>
From: "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 10:14:23 +0900
Message-ID: <CAPK2DezGsNg3PWwLdJ97uKNFie7ri=_CncmY7Y2yVtFxgPKSZQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Cc: "i2nsf@ietf.org" <i2nsf@ietf.org>, skku-iotlab-members <skku-iotlab-members@googlegroups.com>, "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000024f45105a57d4e9f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/8-LhHJ1XiWFEmrQZTDpbacL7JgI>
Subject: Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-05
X-BeenThere: i2nsf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "*I2NSF: Interface to Network Security Functions mailing list*" <i2nsf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2nsf>, <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2nsf/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2nsf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf>, <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 01:14:50 -0000
Hi Roman, I will reflect your comments on the revision. Thanks. Best Regards, Paul On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 7:11 AM Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> wrote: > Hi! > > I conducted an AD review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-05. > Thanks for the work in getting this document written. My most significant > items are around aligning of the text in Section 4 with RFC8329 and the > dependency on draft-dong-i2nsf-asf-config-01. My detailed feedback is > below. > > (1) IDNits returned the following valid comment about references (many > of the issue is noted were in the YANG module) > == Missing Reference: 'RFC3688' is mentioned on line 1764, but not > defined > > (2) Section 1. Typo. s/[draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability]../ > [draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability]./ > > (3) Section 3. Is there a reason to rely on two expired drafts for > terminology -- [draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology] and > [draft-ietf-supa-generic-policy-info-model]? In particular, couldn't > RFC3444 provide the needed definitions of data and information models? > > (4) Section 4. I would have expected somewhere in this overview > section an explicit enumeration of which I2NSF interfaces use this YANG > module. > > (5) Section 4. Per "Figure 1 shows the capabilities of NSFs in I2NSF > Framework." > -- Thanks for reusing the diagram from RFC8329 and annotating it with more > detail. It helps connect the documents > -- It wasn't clear to me where the "capabilities" are on the diagram > -- Is all of the detail under the NSFs (i.e., E, C and A) needed in the > diagram? Text doesn't explain it or reference it. If kept, it should be > explained and E, C and A should be defined (i.e., saying these correspond > to Event, Condition and Action) > > (6) Global. Editorial. Is there a reason to abbreviate "Mgmt" in > "Developer's Mgmt System in the text? Recommend s/Developer's Mgmt > System/Developer's Management System/g > > (7) Section 4. Per "To register NSFs in this way, the Developer's > Mgmt System utilizes this standardized capabilities YANG data model through > its registration interface.", this confused me a bit. Doesn't the > Developer Management System use the model described in > draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm for registration? > > (8) Section 4. Editorial. Per "... those security devices can be > easily managed, ...", I might have used "more easily managed". > > (9) Section 4. Per "The use cases are described below.", where are > those use cases described? Is this text a reference to the "Configuration > Examples" in Appendix A? > > (10) Section 4. Per "Note that the NSF-Facing Interface ... and the > NSF Monitoring Interface is used to ...", does this text need additional > precision based on the definitions in RFC8329. Per RFC8329, the > "NSF-Facing Interfaces" consists of the "NSF Operational and Administrative > Interface" and a "Monitoring Interface". If draft-dong-i2nsf-asf-config is > on the "Monitoring Interface", on which "sub-interface" of the "NSF-Facing > Interface" does draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm belong? > > (11) Figure 1. Editorial Nit. Is there are reason that the > Registration interface has a bidirectional arrow between the network > operator management system and the developer management system, but the > there is no directionality on the consumer or NSF facing interface? > > (12) Section 4. The bulleted list under Figure 1 is helpful in > describing Figure 1. However, I'd recommend explicitly saying this is an > example. Explain the use case up front and then narrate the flow clearly > delineating what is in and out of scope of I2NSF. IMO, the text describes > a number of internal processing functions which are in scope for > standardization - please let me know if I'm reading it wrong. > > (13) Section 4. Per "If network manager wants to block malicious users > with IPv6, the network manager sends the security policy rules to block the > users to the Network Operator Mgmt System using I2NSF user ....", can you > please clarify "malicious users with IPv6"; is the intent that the network > manager is concerned about malicious IPv6 traffic? > > (14) Section 4. Bullet 1 under Figure 1. Per "a web browser or a > software", what's the difference between a browser and software? > > (15) Section 4. Editorial. Per the second bullet under Figure 1, "If > NSFs encounter the malicious packets, it is a tremendous burden for the > network manager to apply the rule to block the malicious packets to NSFs > one-by-one. This problem can be resolved by managing the capabilities of > NSFs.", delete this text. It is a duplicate of what was stated in the > first bullet. > > (16) Section 4. Per the paragraph, "If NSFs encounter the suspicious > IPv4 packets, they can ask the Network Operator Mgmt System for information > about the suspicious IPv4 packets in order to alter specific rules and/or > configurations. When the Network ...", how much of that signaling is in > scope for I2NSF? > > (17) Section 4. Typo. s/suspiciou/suspicious/ > > (18) Section 5.1. Editorial. s/The model includes NSF capabilities/The > model describes NSF capabilities/ > > (19) Section 5.1. Editorial. "specify" is used twice in the sentence. > OLD > Time capabilities are used to specify the capabilities to specify when to > execute the I2NSF policy rule. > NEW > Time capabilities are used to specify the capabilities which describe when > to execute the I2NSF policy rule. > > (20) Section 5.1. Editorial. This sentence didn't parse for me. The > second contains duplicate text. > OLD > Event capabilities are used to specify capabilities how to trigger the > evaluation of the condition clause of the I2NSF Policy Rule. The defined > event capabilities are defined as system event and system alarm. > NEW > Event capabilities are used to specify the capabilities that describe the > event that would trigger the evaluation of the condition clause of the > I2NSF Policy Rule. The defined event capabilities are system event and > system alarm. > > (21) Section 5.1. A number of capabilities note that they can be > extended which is a helpful feature. For example, "The condition > capability can be extended according to specific vendor condition > features." However, where is the guidance on doing that? Likewise, it > might not be necessary to repeat this statement five times if the extension > mechanism is the same. > > (22) Section 5.1. A number of the described capability types state > that they are described in detail in draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability. For > example, "The condition capability is described in detail in > [draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability]." I had difficulty locating which specific > section to review. Also, for the default action capabilities, no described > of "pass, drop .. mirror" was found in draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability. Please > provide a specific section number for the event, condition, action, > resolution strategy and default action in draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability. > > (23) Section 5.1. Editorial. These sentences didn't parse for me. > OLD > Action capabilities are used to specify capabilities of how to control and > monitor aspects of flow-based NSFs when the event and condition clauses are > satisfied. > NEW > Action capabilities are used to specify the capabilities that describe the > control and monitoring aspects of flow-based NSFs when the event and > condition clauses are satisfied. > > OLD > Resolution strategy capabilities are used to specify capabilities of how > to resolve conflicts that occur between the actions of the same or > different policy rules that are matched and contained in this particular > NSF. > NEW > Resolution strategy capabilities are used to specify the capabilities that > describe conflicts that occur between the actions of the same or different > policy rules that are matched and contained in this particular NSF. > > OLD > Default action capabilities are used to specify capabilities of how to > execute I2NSF policy rules when no rule matches a packet. > NEW > Default action capabilities are used to specify the capabilities that > describe how to execute I2NSF policy rules when no rule matches a packet. > > > (24) Section 6.1. Update the copyright date and revision date to be in > 2020. > > (25) Section 6.1. Given that draft-ietf-i2nf-monitoring-data-model is > referenced in the YANG model for event and system alarm, please make it a > normative reference. > > (26) Section 6.1. identity ingress/egress-action-capability. I found > draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-04 to be an unexpected reference. There is no > mention of ingress or egress in that document. > > (27) Section 6.1. identity pass, drop, reject, alert, mirror. I found > draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-04 to be an unexpected reference. There is no > mention of pass, drop, reject, alert or mirror in that document. > > (28) Section 6.1. In the advanced-nsf-capability section, there are > multiple normative references to draft-dong-i2nsf-asf-config-01, an > expired, individual draft. Additionally, Section 4 notes how it supports > the advanced capabilities. This draft is a substantial portion of the YANG > module added in -03. What's the plan on resolving this dependency? > > (29) Section 6.1. Typo. s/Funtion/Function/ > > (30) Section 6.1. The list of references in generic-nsf-capabilities > don't line up with those in the child leaflist(s). For example, RFC 792 is > mentioned in the top level reference list but not in any of the child > leaflist (specifically not in leaf-list icmp-capability) > > (31) Section 6.1. Typo. s/smae/same/ > > (32) Section 8. A few clarifying updates to the template: > OLD > These data nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network > environments. Write operations (e.g., edit-config) to these data nodes > without proper protection can have a negative effect on network operations. > ietf-i2nsf-capability: The attacker may provide incorrect information of > the security capability of any target NSF by illegally modifying this. > > NEW > These data nodes may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network > environments. Write operations to these data nodes could have a negative > effect on network and security operations. > ietf-i2nsf-capability: An attacker could alter the security capabilities > associated with an NSF whereby disabling or enabling the evasion of > security mitigations. > > OLD > ietf-i2nsf-capability: The attacker may gather the security capability > information of any target NSF and misuse the information for subsequent > attacks. > NEW > ietf-i2nsf-capability: An attacker could gather the security capability > information of any NSF and use this information to evade detection or > filtering. > > Regards, > Roman > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > I2nsf@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf > -- =========================== Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Software Sungkyunkwan University Office: +82-31-299-4957 Email: jaehoon.paul@gmail.com, pauljeong@skku.edu Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php <http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php>
- [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-… Roman Danyliw
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Roman Danyliw
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Roman Danyliw
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Roman Danyliw
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Roman Danyliw
- Re: [I2nsf] AD Review of draft-ietf-i2nsf-capabil… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong