Re: [IPsec] New Version Notification for draft-tran-ipsecme-ikev2-yang-00.txt

[Tommy Pauly <[e-mail]>]

I agree that time intervals for IKE retransmits should be measured in milliseconds, not seconds.

Thanks,
Tommy

> On Mar 28, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Daniel Migault <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> With the second as a unit. We cannot do it. However if we set it millisecond we are fine. We also have a field that specify the policy. This field should provide the policies of the different implementtation.  Such feed back is definitely usefull for the next iteration of the draft.
> 
> BR
> Daniel
> 
> On Mar 28, 2016 18:06, "Paul Wouters" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Mar 28, 2016, at 16:43, Daniel Migault <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Paul, 
>> 
>> I leave my co-authors to respond on the YANG aspects. 
>> 
>> Regarding the initial-retransmission-timeout I think we meant a time in second. Do you think we need more options?
> 
> Libreswan retransmits at 0.5 second and the doubling the interval up to 30 seconds. So 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16.
> 
> I don't think that you can put that in?
> 
> Note I didn't read all the options, there might be others too. I think to be sure, you need to look at various implementations and see if it can work.
> 
> Paul
> 
>> BR, 
>> Daniel
>> 
>> On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Paul Wouters <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2016, Daniel Migault wrote:
>> 
>> Subject: [IPsec] FW: New Version Notification for
>>     draft-tran-ipsecme-ikev2-yang-00.txt
>> 
>> Please find our first version for the YANG model for IKEv2. Feel free
>> to post comments. I would be also happy to have face-to-face
>> discussions on the draft - especially from IKEv2 implementers.
>> 
>> Might be good for me to have a talk about it, especially because I'm
>> not a yang person. . I'm still a bit confused about the syntax. There is
>> code in the document that looks like "ready to use" but also looks like
>> "example to use". like:
>> 
>>   description
>>        "This YANG module defines the configuration and operational
>>         state data for Internet Key Exchange version 2 (IKEv2) on
>>         IETF draft.
>>         Copyright (c) 2016 Ericsson AB.
>>         All rights reserved.";
>> 
>> All rights reserved? huh? Is that an example? or is this an error?
>> 
>> I'm confused about units too, like:
>> 
>>   leaf initial-retransmission-timeout {
>>            type uint32;
>>            description
>>              "initial retransmission timeout value";
>>          }
>> 
>> look weird to me. What's the unit here? uint32 is not a unit, it is
>> a number Is this seconds? miliseconds? seconds since 1970? Since 1772?
>> 
>> Some of it looks like just copying IANA registries? So that would be
>> outdated quickly. How would that get updated? Should we really put
>> chunks of code in RFCs like that?
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> IPsec mailing list
>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> IPsec mailing list
>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec