Re: [midcom] security recommendations in MIDCOM MIB draft

Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com> Wed, 04 July 2007 06:49 UTC

Return-path: <midcom-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I5ygU-0001No-Lg; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:49:54 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I5ygT-0001Hp-FP for midcom@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:49:53 -0400
Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.170] helo=mgw-ext11.nokia.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I5ygN-0004pD-6W for midcom@ietf.org; Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:49:53 -0400
Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-ext11.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l646nf5W014250; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:49:42 +0300
Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:49:39 +0300
Received: from mgw-int01.ntc.nokia.com ([172.21.143.96]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:49:38 +0300
Received: from [172.21.34.161] (esdhcp034161.research.nokia.com [172.21.34.161]) by mgw-int01.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l646naN0030327; Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:49:37 +0300
In-Reply-To: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A041DBA15@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
References: <6AFFE92CEE03A3E6C2E61771@753F3B888A9969457862729D> <01D6CAF6-5E1F-413B-843C-20BFB3D38F79@nokia.com> <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A041DBA15@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Message-Id: <B24E7670-87BA-42EB-8FFC-BDB828C8D699@nokia.com>
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [midcom] security recommendations in MIDCOM MIB draft
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 09:49:31 +0300
To: "ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jul 2007 06:49:39.0046 (UTC) FILETIME=[7DF2C860:01C7BE07]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0fa76816851382eb71b0a882ccdc29ac
Cc: midcom@ietf.org, Tim Polk <tim.polk@nist.gov>, ops-ads@tools.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: midcom@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: midcom.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom>, <mailto:midcom-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:midcom@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:midcom-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom>, <mailto:midcom-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1809116438=="
Errors-To: midcom-bounces@ietf.org

On 2007-7-4, at 9:43, ext Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> So, I am not sure that I see the problem. The MIDCOM MIB document  
> seems
> to be OK in adopting a strict secure mode SNMPv3 requirement.

There is not a problem then. I just wanted to make sure that the  
MIDCOM MIB doesn't make statements it shouldn't make.

> If we need
> to discuss a change in the security considerations for other MIB
> documents we should discuss this separately.

No, that's not what this was about.

Thanks!

Lars
_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
midcom@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom