Re: [Netconf] WGLC for draft-ietf-netconf-tls-04.txt

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 02:05:51PM +0800, fanhuaxiang 90002624 wrote:
> Hi,
> in section 2, it says,
> "The other party MUST respond with a close_notify alert of
> its own and close down the connection immediately, discarding any
> pending writes"
> I wanna ask why immediately instead of sending pening writes before
> close down the connection.

And I like to add whether it is normal practice that the TLS teardown
procedure is application protocol specific. RFC 5246 section 7.2.1
discusses closure alerts in TLS 1.2 and I like to understand why we
need additional text for NETCONF over TLS.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 BremeFrom [e-mail]  Sat Sep 27 02:06:24 2008
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D0A3A68C2;
	Sat, 27 Sep 2008 02:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: [e-mail]
Delivered-To: [e-mail]
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A80D3A68C2
	for <[e-mail]>; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 02:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.249
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, 
	BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id lpR866EmrrTI for <[e-mail]>;
	Sat, 27 Sep 2008 02:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de
	[212.201.44.23])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 309593A68EE
	for <[e-mail]>; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 02:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.46])
	by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id F104FC0086;
	Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:06:28 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23])
	by localhost (demetrius1.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32])
	(amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id MPiJRJrZYZON; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:06:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from elstar.local (elstar.iuhb02.iu-bremen.de [10.50.231.133])
	by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE605C0079;
	Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:06:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501)
	id 821807BAEEA; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:06:22 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:06:22 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>
To: fanhuaxiang 90002624 <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mail-Followup-To: fanhuaxiang 90002624 <[e-mail]>,
	"Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <[e-mail]>,
	[e-mail]
References: <[e-mail]>
	<[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Netconf] WGLC for draft-ietf-netconf-tls-04.txt
X-BeenThere: [e-mail]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: [e-mail]
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/netconf>
List-Post: <mailto:[e-mail]>
List-Help: <mailto:[e-mail]?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>,
	<mailto:[e-mail]?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]

On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 02:05:51PM +0800, fanhuaxiang 90002624 wrote:
> Hi,
> in section 2, it says,
> "The other party MUST respond with a close_notify alert of
> its own and close down the connection immediately, discarding any
> pending writes"
> I wanna ask why immediately instead of sending pening writes before
> close down the connection.

And I like to add whether it is normal practice that the TLS teardown
procedure is application protocol specific. RFC 5246 section 7.2.1
discusses closure alerts in TLS 1.2 and I like to understand why we
need additional text for NETCONF over TLS.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759n, Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
_______________________________________________
Netconf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf


 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
_______________________________________________
Netconf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf