Re: [Netconf] [i2rs] 1 week extension to WG Adoption call for draft-mglt-i2rs-security-environments

"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Thu, 03 September 2015 00:33 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C22001AD2A9; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 17:33:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.054
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.054 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=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 sZijRKzhvBLa; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 17:33:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) (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 149A51ACE72; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 17:33:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=174.124.171.7;
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: 'Linda Dunbar' <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>, i2rs@ietf.org
References: <005101d0e4d8$fb07ddd0$f1179970$@ndzh.com> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F657D1D986@dfweml701-chm>
In-Reply-To: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F657D1D986@dfweml701-chm>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 20:33:29 -0400
Message-ID: <004201d0e5e0$280537d0$780fa770$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0043_01D0E5BE.A0F51E70"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQEHZB6VALgirVXrlqDwm5wqDQpvRQEuWz0kn7OE6vA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/NfYoCLep0zlJD9cEQiIVATVNO-A>
Cc: 'Netconf' <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] [i2rs] 1 week extension to WG Adoption call for draft-mglt-i2rs-security-environments
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 03 Sep 2015 00:33:38 -0000

Linda 

<co-author hat on> 

We will include closed environments in the revised document. 

 

Sue 

 

From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 12:54 PM
To: Susan Hares; i2rs@ietf.org
Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas'; 'Netconf'
Subject: Re: [i2rs] 1 week extension to WG Adoption call for
draft-mglt-i2rs-security-environments

 

Can the authors address my comments and the suggested changes to add a
section on security threats and the associated requirements  with Closed
Environment?

 

Closed environment deployment can easily give people a sense of secure
because the links between I2RS Client and I2RS Agent are guided by a
physical "Wall".  The false sense of "Secure" is actually more dangerous
because it can easily make the deployment miss the crucial security
procedure. 

 

Therefore, I think it is important to have a dedicated section on security
threats and requirement for the Closed Environment. 

 

Attached is my suggested text. 

 

Linda

 

From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 12:10 PM
To: i2rs@ietf.org
Cc: 'Jeffrey Haas'; 'Netconf'
Subject: [i2rs] 1 week extension to WG Adoption call for
draft-mglt-i2rs-security-environments

 

This is a 1 week extension to the WG adoption call for
draft-mglt-i2rs-security.  Due error in the initial call email, the exact
text to review was unclear (
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/wwv1o8_mwurB05dN4D2yjr9tNFg). 

 

In reviewing the email, it appears that the authors have agree to change or
delete most of the concerns except for combining this draft with
draft-hares-i2rs-auth-trans-04.txt.   The chairs have decided to adopt both
drafts as WG drafts, and make a subsequent WG calls to determine if the
drafts should be combined. 

 

This draft is at:  

 

https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-mglt-i2rs-security-environment-reqs-00.txt

 

Daniel has indicated several changes on the list.  If you would like to see
a revised draft for further comments, please indicate this on the list. 

 

Sue Hares and Jeff Haas 

I2RS co-chairs