Re: [Netconf] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-25: (with COMMENT)
"Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Thu, 06 December 2018 15:49 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.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 4AE06130DC6; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 07:49:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 nnMJ1TAhbMy5; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 07:49:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (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 71227130DFA; Thu, 6 Dec 2018 07:49:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ict-networks-2001-067c-10ec-5785-8000-0000-0000-0430.fwd-v6.ethz.ch ([2001:67c:10ec:5785:8000::430]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1gUvuO-0004Wp-CM; Thu, 06 Dec 2018 16:49:48 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)" <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <B0AF8548-5434-4A25-8D61-D80F6CB57FF6@juniper.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 16:49:46 +0100
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch@ietf.org>, "netconf-chairs@ietf.org" <netconf-chairs@ietf.org>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9964AC41-9B1E-4348-94C8-C9CED80D9147@kuehlewind.net>
References: <154360369395.27402.18143504350346119719.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <B0AF8548-5434-4A25-8D61-D80F6CB57FF6@juniper.net>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1544111391;f26890c2;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1gUvuO-0004Wp-CM
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/1NqK4QxUGhoPMjzRjckEP9T2hPg>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-25: (with 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: Thu, 06 Dec 2018 15:49:54 -0000
Thanks! That helps! > Am 06.12.2018 um 02:40 schrieb Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>: > > Hi Mirja, > > Thanks for your review! > Please see below for responses. > > Kent // principle author > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Thanks for this well-written doc. >> >> One quick question which wasn't fully clear to me from the text >> in the doc: If onboarding fails at some point, is the device >> supposed to iterate over another bootstrapping source or stop >> completely? > > The device is to never stop trying to bootstrap, even in case of > a failed attempt. The hope is that that the device's failed > attempts will be noticed and rectified by an administrator of > the operator's orchestrator/NMS system. > > Checking the text to ensure this intent is conveyed, we find in > Section 5.3: > > Otherwise, the device MUST attempt to process the onboarding > information as described in Section 5.6. In either case, success or > failure, the device MUST exit the recursive algorithm, returning to > the bootstrapping sequence described in Section 5.2, the only > difference being in how it responds to the "Able to bootstrap from > any source?" conditional described in the figure in the section. > > So, in your case, it is a "failure" and thus the answer to the > conditional is "No". However, to your point, the current s5.2 > text says "Loop and/or wait for manual provisioning", which > isn't quite right. I have fixed this in the Github commit > link provided below. > > Continuing checking the text, we also find in Section 5.6: > > If the device encounters an error at any step, it MUST stop > processing the onboarding information and return to the bootstrapping > sequence described in Section 5.2. In the context of a recursive > algorithm, the device MUST return to the enclosing loop, not back to > the very beginning. > > Which I think is pretty good as is, though it might help to tack > onto the end of the last sentence ", thus allowing the logic to > attempt all possible bootstrapping options before starting over." > Thoughts? > > > >> One minor comment: >> Maybe spell out TPM and provide a reference. > > Fixed all three instances of "TPM". > > > > Here is the Github commit for the above changes, as well as a > minor/unrelated RFC4408-reference issue reported by Adam: > > https://github.com/netconf-wg/zero-touch/commit/0e86ec25f0f83c49dc1ec37e2b9f20bdec874a6f > > Thoughts? > > Kent > > > >
- [Netconf] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft… Mirja Kühlewind
- Re: [Netconf] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on d… Kent Watsen
- Re: [Netconf] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on d… Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
- Re: [Netconf] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on d… Kent Watsen
- Re: [Netconf] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on d… Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)