Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration-04.txt> (Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP Networks) to Informational RFC
Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Sat, 28 July 2012 13:12 UTC
Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53AA421F85FC; Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:12:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.458
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.458 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.141, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aGIJA5TRZNpG; Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E7A21F85FB; Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo14 with SMTP id fo14so3630599vcb.31 for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=KnxBnpDOaDqDJhEyVQR8x5868a5ezOdOynm/6e7X8s8=; b=eogTPEJ2/WnuYaPvsg2da8lUGLkz2yM05yvdXffiogNJLI/eFLz/ynFEx9TZgAFtjR FqCJXhbaD8GLmqX0Fo/h0OFhpyHVx1g0EbihSEckGlSAm0NVOmy2LGbu5qt6RR0a1ZqM WUuk2OpRAw2GqhXGXKjYVtQWMxFnmPbwVevuPvnkl3uMD3jSKoMwekkxdfHcpUqkh5Rk +VvQfFQpx1Hcm3Oz8yN8Zdhg/y3Et0LsM1mm14BDIk943T10ZAnB8PwamRdHpY8E5DLT vvqCHf/okoqG9VDNWPVPNxcm5qOIKv+uz9LjOsAEO4FtVJj/mKCmXsql4DMqWBvh/7Iq O8Nw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.204.212 with SMTP id fn20mr5510472vcb.43.1343481162020; Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.141.200 with HTTP; Sat, 28 Jul 2012 06:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 15:12:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ89c42DQ95OrHn+G-x3sLrHw7ktzwXvrwkBR+gQshzR_1A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-network-configuration-04.txt> (Problem Statement for the Automated Configuration of Large IP Networks) to Informational RFC
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
To: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, tina.tsou.zouting@huawei.com
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 13:12:43 -0000
The draft-04 states in page-8: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5.1. Establishment of Link Layer Connectivity The protocol aspects of this phase are out of scope, since it involves non-IETF protocols only. While some link-layer technologies may provide authentication and access control, this cannot be assumed to be available in the general case. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If Link protocol is a non-IETF why it will be out of scope while used by the IP devices? in the end the IP is over link protocols and interacts with the below protocols. Why we need applicability-statements or problem-statements if we think the link layer is out of scope of IETF-RFCs? Regards AB
- Re: [OPSAWG] Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-automa… joel jaeggli
- Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-automated-netwo… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [OPSAWG] Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-automa… Randy Bush