Re: [netconf] WGLC on draft-ietf-netconf-tls-client-server

Dhruv Dhody <> Tue, 20 April 2021 06:40 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E3B3A11E5 for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 23:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YKAd2sBwFt9A for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 23:40:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 884EB3A11E4 for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 23:40:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id f21so1285561ioh.8 for <>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 23:40:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iLUUSpdjrBg62wdvvO/8RKM1tNpApHAIXasUJKkn7Sw=; b=t2aoIZBA802n61UbG7RHlNqL/bAqADpRnSMFCYSTiEwcxk8CxpyHkvSpXiUej2cuhq KnngTikZjD7W0DugI+YJyQC4pPa8JgoEZvPAOSbbheVoHj4bSAgnrs/g9Dj2+rUDm2VF RakDl2pX2DBm44hh9hW/+lj32G6r4wgQZjXUiJSJoF4VvRuQtDhTCyypYBJi6IBlWstI TrMMsC6L0cLIwP/H0jHjY5IahMGGviuSV9siAnHxHOKS1CocGpetVfQhWlAjeUAYrZ0p GR4+bQmjvQIxOHzHmPkpSZtds1pbFXVgxnCOpqJ6hikvKhtgcx/JaRQe2zxQ7Nxdhb/7 7ouw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iLUUSpdjrBg62wdvvO/8RKM1tNpApHAIXasUJKkn7Sw=; b=ZQ5cKWcpKCd8q+LgCv3QkrwrTX0UmubQ9mdi5CT1QY/f/dfjGQdZTiH82ouxfPaYQr UBUu+J5g2cCzP25DgcGQE6O2aBkFxF8SBP8+FKHQu6MNOuIS+UVfAN80GSyHiANRqPg4 ojgZAHoAQrkr1m37LnKbhNVjsXjDJsSJbkPXl4zaG5TjOgcQFDCqYXQQVus5T4QvLEcq ndd7nYM1RPa7JERXaS+NmiEUaSqo0rzZaIEDL5lKgJtxvkO2ywdKlrmekRafy/QyZaLq WYgn1GTR8xgtiUPjPJ/gFv3dNJdl/xQ4X+uG45t1wmv3uFFOmGKmDX87h9zOl4BYZK+L 0OIA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532AQQoDD1WdxeXXC1w/3MURH0slSaWiOCNhudkcoPSrN7hQ5TaO AMZ0xiokwQBX94wOs/hKgZM+7PUzDJoycb9JSzo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw65B8r2vX87ETuaGSvFLjH0YOZWjWlbTykWbHylFPqu9N9GMJ055O9IZ08XionUFzS7g27Up9UlvzyAc6sufo=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:c618:: with SMTP id i24mr19846803jan.15.1618900818754; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 23:40:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Dhruv Dhody <>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 12:09:42 +0530
Message-ID: <>
To: Kent Watsen <>
Cc: Mahesh Jethanandani <>, "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003a814705c061b898"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netconf] WGLC on draft-ietf-netconf-tls-client-server
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: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 06:40:25 -0000

Hi Kent,

> - I am wondering if anything needs to be done for the older versions of
> TLS which are made historic. The use of features helps, is there any other
> guidance that needs to be given?
> We could set the “status” to “deprecated”.  That said, it's one thing to
> say that a protocol is deprecated and another to say that the configuration
> for a still somewhat widely-used deprecated-protocol is
> deprecated…thoughts?
I agree that we need to allow the configuration of older TLS versions in
the YANG module.

I found this comment from Ben to be useful -
. I ended up putting MD5 and SHA-1 support under a feature 'deprecated'. In
this case, I think just adding some text in the description around the
existing features for older TLS could also do the job.

Thanks for taking my comments into consideration!