Re: [netconf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-09.txt

Kent Watsen <> Mon, 24 June 2019 12:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7EE12012B for <>; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:32:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vWGFq3P_nLwx for <>; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85F01120048 for <>; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 05:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=6gbrjpgwjskckoa6a5zn6fwqkn67xbtw;; t=1561379551; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:Feedback-ID; bh=AGyAPWL8vpNoZ7cuwGi7D6Swt+dKPsnOJeIwJPrIUIw=; b=DOhwJT834zK4GRhIkTgCyStbojpx7Wvw/Kz8bdqnUe8zj1dV50Q/XStmg7gfrT/6 ifUcvyqhsgichI48u1ar6t0cKDiidjCNaI9aocS1IYxzE+RzhqSWQZzCwcUuwXXMlbU QODZzg7KT9S8EGzUjtrPsSre5kRwVclL/+Es+9sI=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Kent Watsen <>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16F203)
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:32:31 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
To: Martin Bjorklund <>
X-SES-Outgoing: 2019.06.24-
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netconf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-09.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:32:34 -0000

>> but, actually, I think it's from an earlier
>> thread in which I believe Lada stated rationale for using enumerations
>> instead of identities (I can't find that thread right now).
> This is a pretty drastic change to this module, and it is based on a
> discussion that you think have taken place, but can't find?

That could’ve been worded differently, but note that:

1) This part of the module is being developed by my co-author.  While I pushed the button to publish it, he is more involved and tracking details. 

2) I recall the thread occurring, but couldn’t find it in my local archive (likely due to the Juniper switch out) and the online search function is pretty weak.

Kent // contributor