Re: [mpls] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Venkatesan Mahalingam <venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com> Tue, 08 September 2015 15:33 UTC
Return-Path: <venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B96871B2D2A; Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:33:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 5flqbdF3jYnm; Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x236.google.com (mail-la0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::236]) (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 406961B2CED; Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by laeb10 with SMTP id b10so72683873lae.1; Tue, 08 Sep 2015 08:33:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=1f5j8hwg6oB6pU0ba6s7r6HsX0NTW451918T/cUWI7I=; b=qP796F/bIJ9SRdI0PRIDmCYsg+DiVjYI8HnCxFYs8R/9EeqTro5gQqaPVRb0o4qz3Q tXsKZJ8XWPAau/iiyZtq7D4m3RTVnlGTXfzWXDRj2k5C4pIc9LMUeDYSTZFPBpv3CIgm 1tyKGIkmRo1gRcbCP0kGPoy/WnGMfZXI/Ls7UP9PWil3Uc6wK72DVOFbuuI+Z/dV/9Lt zfKoLYZ7koBOYbMilvqJDHfm15K6G/vZOQkfyVi3NTohNxV3JYw9ahv6dFvXYB7mchHb O0oNUEQHkY6Uax91RkDZCAqtOYfHlERp0jhcbxn1ylZlbhlZ7sdWsUsuriMhW1byEvus z9Sg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.150.3 with SMTP id ue3mr23144683lbb.51.1441726425226; Tue, 08 Sep 2015 08:33:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.25.22.94 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:33:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+UNA03O1Vx7VLpagc-4S0j3ndpwgC4_kCA1-RXZyNQVZW8i5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150903065902.11053.69251.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+UNA03O1Vx7VLpagc-4S0j3ndpwgC4_kCA1-RXZyNQVZW8i5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 08:33:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+UNA00vUm7WLZP7zDLPoFco8LkVoVbKJg2TkP_oA8KQEbfKCw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Venkatesan Mahalingam <venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com>
To: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b3437ea70633e051f3e17a9"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/_3exhBIWqHKX_qmzFFNGElPTGyc>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Joan Cucchiara <jcucchiara@mindspring.com>, mpls-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib.shepherd@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib.ad@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 15:33:49 -0000
Dear Benoit, I've addressed all your comments and published the new version 10, please take look. -Venkat. On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Venkatesan Mahalingam < venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Benoit and Joan, > > We will publish the next version with the below changes in the security > section, hope this is fine. > > OLD > > Section-8 > > There are number of management objects defined in this MIB module > with a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-create. Such objects may be > considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. > The support for SET operations in a non-secure environment > *without proper protection can have negative effect on network > operations.* > > NEW > > Section-8 > > There are number of management objects defined in this MIB module > with a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-create. Such objects may be > considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. > The support for SET operations in a non-secure environment without proper protection opens devices to attack. > > Regd, Joan's comments, I dont see any reported warnings on version 09, > > Joan: If you could quickly verify the compilation on version 09 and > confirm, if would be of great help as IESG approval is pending for this > draft. > > timeout 10 smilint -s -e -l 6 mibs/MPLS-OAM-ID-STD-MIB 2>report.txt > > While processing your request the following errors and/or warnings have > been found: > > mibs/MPLS-OAM-ID-STD-MIB:83: [2] {object-identifier-not-prefix} Object identifier element `xxx' name only allowed as first element > mibs/MPLS-OAM-ID-STD-MIB:23: [2] {module-identity-registration} illegal module identity registration > > > -Venkat. > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote: > >> Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib-09: Discuss >> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this >> introductory paragraph, however.) >> >> >> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-id-mib/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> DISCUSS: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Based on the feedback of the security AD, the security guidelines for the >> IETF MIB modules >> (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/mib-security) have been >> changed 9 months ago. >> The exact change at >> >> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/mib-security?action=diff&version=7&old_version=6 >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> The MIB doctor latest review from Joan Cucchiara: >> >> My comments (which I made to the authors also about Feb 28, 2015) was >> about these warnings: >> Warning with SMICNG compiler: >> >> W: f(MPLS-TP-OAM-MIB.my), (883,22) MIN-ACCESS value identical to access >> specified for "mplsOamIdMegOperStatus" >> W: f(MPLS-TP-OAM-MIB.my), (888,22) MIN-ACCESS value identical to access >> specified for "mplsOamIdMegSubOperStatus" >> >> Yes, these are just warnings, but they are easily fixable and I believe >> the authors agreed to fix these warnings during the AD review process >> (that would be you >> >> Other than these warnings, the MIB is fine with me to go forward. >> >> >> >
- [mpls] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-mpls… Benoit Claise
- Re: [mpls] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-… Venkatesan Mahalingam
- Re: [mpls] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-… Venkatesan Mahalingam