Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08: (with COMMENT)

Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@kot-begemot.co.uk> Tue, 24 January 2017 18:14 UTC

Return-Path: <anton.ivanov@kot-begemot.co.uk>
X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9D86129601 for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:14:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 iT7EwQWTp_Ne for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:14:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from www.kot-begemot.co.uk (ivanoab5.miniserver.com [78.31.111.25]) (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 E5DF91295B3 for <i2rs@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:14:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tun5.smaug.kot-begemot.co.uk ([192.168.18.6] helo=smaug.kot-begemot.co.uk) by www.kot-begemot.co.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <anton.ivanov@kot-begemot.co.uk>) id 1cW5cH-0003Wv-Iy; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 18:14:49 +0000
Received: from wyvern.kot-begemot.co.uk ([192.168.3.72]) by smaug.kot-begemot.co.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <anton.ivanov@kot-begemot.co.uk>) id 1cW5cH-0003JP-Ad; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 18:14:49 +0000
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, i2rs@ietf.org
References: <000701d27594$28d12350$7a7369f0$@ndzh.com> <20170123.194721.1193117831378217486.mbj@tail-f.com> <010a01d275b0$183d7360$48b85a20$@ndzh.com> <20170123.212621.119545616051737472.mbj@tail-f.com> <afdfb4d3-0901-2ee0-8d87-f8f1aeeff37e@hq.sk> <019c01d275c4$edf51f30$c9df5d90$@ndzh.com> <20170123221458.GA34192@elstar.local> <029301d27636$f2514690$d6f3d3b0$@ndzh.com> <20170124115221.GD35835@elstar.local> <87f80f69-5a3c-18a0-8f4f-e560572417e8@kot-begemot.co.uk> <008d01d2766a$5387def0$fa979cd0$@ndzh.com>
From: Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@kot-begemot.co.uk>
Message-ID: <605f2ce5-6685-3792-83b6-f95faa8a76ec@kot-begemot.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 18:14:49 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <008d01d2766a$5387def0$fa979cd0$@ndzh.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/CD8fpxEhq1uOm3khOLkoql0pNZQ>
Subject: Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <i2rs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2rs/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2rs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 18:14:54 -0000

I am not blaming the messenger.

I am just noting that from my implementer's viewpoint your security 
concerns seem different if you are presented as config=true or config=false.

These have a different security model by definition and by 
implementation in most cases.

This is in addition to the specific I2RS security concerns.

A.

On 24/01/17 17:50, Susan Hares wrote:
> Anton:
>   
> See earlier message to Martin.  Topology models are I2RS YANG Models
> designed for ephemeral state with specific security concerns.  This is not
> your basic YANG model no matter which data store ephemeral gets linked to.
> Where is ephemeral state?  By IESG Design of charter, I2RS is not in charge
> of defining ephemeral state solution.  NETMOD/NETCONF are.  Go ask them.
>
> Do not blame the messenger echoing NETMOD results,
>
> Sue
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anton Ivanov
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 8:30 AM
> To: i2rs@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08: (with COMMENT)
>
> On 24/01/17 11:52, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>> Susan,
>>
>> so are these YANG models regular YANG models or are these YANG models
>> specific to the yet to be defined I2RS protocol and yet to be defined
>> datastores?
>>
>> I think this is the core of Martin's and my question. A simple clear
>> and concise answer would be nice.
> +1.
>
> A.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> i2rs@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
>
>