Re: [Netconf] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-25: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net> Wed, 09 January 2019 22:20 UTC

Return-Path: <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40304126DBF; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 14:20:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.401
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=bbiw.net
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 gTFK9AZFUNVE; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 14:20:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9296124D68; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 14:20:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id x09ML3V2017396 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 9 Jan 2019 14:21:03 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=bbiw.net; s=default; t=1547072464; bh=EsJ48IKFdWbO46o7Zdcp5c7vsXJOXslBdMAF4KZ3JaQ=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=SMImscqHHVqWRaxRQOG/ySnPiozicC3PTKG35g237hw0jJtl0UAOAW+PnqTO8X+Z+ pH+oSkqFsOcKazz3PBjJ5TMObSx0pKm8AERtrCqURzOlEIfUD3I19HSaCZsowl94f7 9mU4kCb7EMRY0z4joRUJeH/+OBlNie2HQcVuqnUc=
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Cc: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "netconf-chairs@ietf.org" <netconf-chairs@ietf.org>
References: <154390493154.31734.13025584839857369253.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F526DA60-77EC-45D6-ADE0-B345020A89BF@juniper.net> <20181230003002.GC57547@kduck.kaduk.org> <5DCD6C74-7918-45AB-BEA7-2C1A020B4411@juniper.net> <20190106050255.GJ28515@kduck.kaduk.org> <35A436B3-5D57-4015-A51E-5F9A1E349D31@juniper.net> <DAC627AC-8453-41D2-B95C-BC25746E66C1@juniper.net> <cc5adc78-6751-fabf-03d2-e0c65f8a6c91@bbiw.net> <20190109210622.GH28515@kduck.mit.edu> <f00010d6-4a5a-259a-259f-b70efb70eff5@bbiw.net> <20190109220007.GI28515@kduck.mit.edu>
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Message-ID: <1629c7a3-18e3-8479-9928-736b22f39d06@bbiw.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 14:19:49 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190109220007.GI28515@kduck.mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/-p4HCdvDgaD_15OtpzMtJYQAyDw>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-25: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 22:20:03 -0000

On 1/9/2019 2:00 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 01:48:18PM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> On 1/9/2019 1:06 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
>>>> I believe your analysis is correct.
>>>>
>>>> In the names your draft uses, _tcp is the global scoped name, relevant
>>>> to attrleaf, while _sztp is subordinate and therefore not relevant to
>>>> attrleaf.
>>> That's true for both
>>> SRV in _sztp._tcp.example.com.
>>> and
>>> TXT in <serial number>._sztp._tcp.example.com.
>>> but it's not clear to me that the "existing" TXT _tcp registration is
>>> appropriate for our usage here.
>>
>>
>> I'm pretty sure it is.
>>
>>   > TXT        | _tcp                | [RFC6763]
>>
>> The existing entry for TXT/_tcp in the attrleaf registry reserves the
>> global use of _tcp and assigned responsibility for it to RFC 6763.
> 
> Right.
> 
> But RFC 6763 is DNS Service Discovery, whose TXT records have a particular
> structure, defined in its (subsections of) Section 6.  That is not what's
> going on here.
> 
> So what should the attrleaf registry say about TXT _tcp that would actually
> be relevant for our usage?


I'll admit to winging it, as I type this, so I won't be surprised if I'm 
seriously misunderstanding, but...

I think what you are saying is that your planned use conflicts with the 
usage defined in the existing TXT use under 6763.

Unless I'm misreading that doc, it doesn't provide for subordinate 
underscored naming.  Right?

So that means your spec has created a conflict.

I suspect it stems from the fact that you also use SRV, which has 
standardized use of _tcp and you are merely trying to stay with that 
framework.

I think the solution is that you should not stay with that framework, 
for the TXT record and therefore should use some new, global underscored 
name and register in the attrleaf registry.  (Remember, I said I was 
winging it....)

d/


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net