Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Fix of Security Guidelines for IETF MIB Modules

Warren Kumari <> Sun, 30 September 2018 18:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642AB130DEA for <>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 11:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 26jZlJwBWsiz for <>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 11:34:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::334]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19AA8130DCD for <>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 11:34:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id y25-v6so6522617wmi.1 for <>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 11:34:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=nfgURVENd8em0vEPADhfLR2yYFpxTZBa5NEo10IngfE=; b=KuZ9FLv4neuxVmCrFgOYeaKufuH8uVancz8kpno6PWflcnfyWL326gdbxDf/TfBDz5 gvrKO+Pc0ZVwbmKDg9A+TCsJdBgGl7SoZos0HlgyuWiwJYnhK3/19YZLV4Qmq45NotjI bV+a/RGWg0sHov0c9Az472+yu9F+LVxP8cRDh4P6TiLCTRaalgYAKNnMJfd9uKzEkZJJ YMgYci6l8gXOrjp/nRK3iQGV66aLHdj1FrnjDy8SgpgAM6x+HkZabDCwE3cJzYtVQw9i 2xOOvdOp2YT4/3509OkL8w3A4Ab359fedICd8AVGvf/aZFmsGdeG+pi461JXe4S6sUhw ykEw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nfgURVENd8em0vEPADhfLR2yYFpxTZBa5NEo10IngfE=; b=HiIPoIkFtQTCiJeYQjxdQGoqAQRMGBOv+25L7QHKpsyAS8tkzfRCvFq/2u3p3+B8OZ sYiibgwH/d82kf0QwDT4SKb29vx2bAC58KXijq4CA5VgyMDOS7KKbLj5Y6FPVK9xwFoT d0hfRhwaRNGLB0u4LT1EHU7U3VhvsQ0U/UViZ36+busMZOXN4Qeqr4uVsIc+4PJiSq1F opAyAl/rQeWaYjKbeEyQnitgRRvZbr0PoOoY4smohXSABxC9WaRYCiSkEpjyDfxnTXzy BcYDLk1ze3iIfVXjRTsKMziiDY8t9DL4HO7XEGm7Ad/PkajkAEMbrXPmdIUadteZaMC3 uHxA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoi0aYhKq30ILZiD/p2KYA+a8P8488sCeOaNP+5G2m07LiNXtVT/ 0Ztf7+Ho6oLpHUxUcP9H5jieWgjB825XWB6Mvkxz2Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV63NqcCcDlm4A7NQJwMiKHeROs/y5DBJrH/BC0p5ICWQAb07yTI7td/iViCeIV0nSPJsjD7EanVVUlIGG05rQw8=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6744:: with SMTP id b65-v6mr7165150wmc.98.1538332440062; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 11:34:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Warren Kumari <>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 14:33:22 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Cc: Ignas Bagdonas <>,
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a3035505771aeed9"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Fix of Security Guidelines for IETF MIB Modules
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: MIB Doctors list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 18:34:04 -0000

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 2:53 AM Glenn Mansfield Keeni <>

> Warren,Ignas,
>         Hi. The Security Guidelines for IETF MIB Modules
> needs a fix in the text that is generally used verbatim
> in MIB documents.
> The proposed fix is
> OLD: Some of the readable objects in this MIB module
>       (i.e., objects with a MAX-ACCESS other than
>        not-accessible)
> NEW: Some of the readable objects in this MIB module
>       (e.g., objects with a MAX-ACCESS other than
>        not-accessible)
> The above is a significant nit. It appears in the
> Security Considerations sections section of every
> MIB document.
> There has been some discussion on the IETF MIB-DOCTORS
> mailing list on this matter. There is no disagreement
> on the proposed fix.
> Please advise on how to proceed on this matter.

I'm obviously not Igans (he's got more, and better hair), but this is
clearly a nit that is easy to address.
I propose we fix this nit now, and the larger discussion can continue -
'tis trivial to update the boilerplate again once the larger discussion has

Sound reasonable? I'll let Ignas to make the call (it's more on his side of
the house than mine).


> Thanks,
> Glenn

I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of