Re: [Netconf] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netconf-rfc5539bis-07

Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Mon, 26 January 2015 18:30 UTC

Return-Path: <mjethanandani@gmail.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 29A3E1A6FEF for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:30:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 gTlbv5bCfKLD for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:30:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x230.google.com (mail-oi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCE7E1A7007 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:30:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f48.google.com with SMTP id v63so8565806oia.7 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:30:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=26HzLQU4ZeNa/Hd6j+X5L2OTjkc9HZcUuPKx64qU5DA=; b=tmHIYdC3cA936kONqShsKoWy/6jvjehlaX75CcDA8OAKVpHOWBp2Ct9J8qN0nExPHj wivu84Y1fagoGcW7ijCkh0y1syUlQNHxuuwHAeFr56ZF8fVgVZ3tnsEwPLWecC4x7tV+ EJBDHNOAEBqpLJCKKGkk0zL7mWY/c2TXuTi/1xvqz6wwF/vpA4Pd05v4k/pEzNN15zna OH6F2Ca/ddnjFjtSc2jfs2CUaYFqLWgpM24P+P7Cx5LcmB6PdZjac4bfW6pTUZMGkxxf E7oxmt7c+ykoz4pMnr7jxSHecBaly44ToMr6leBGUDQ9qROZEjqpGNujbwcYB+xgPXma MhFA==
X-Received: by 10.182.81.195 with SMTP id c3mr13836595oby.60.1422297025117; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:30:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <E4DE949E6CE3E34993A2FF8AE79131F8195A73B5@DEMUMBX005.nsn-intra.net> <B280E3CD-5846-42E4-B0C6-5B603A548263@gmail.com> <20150126102748.GA49439@elstar.local>
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 18:30:24 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAchPMvkYPnYQ1hOFkydePHYSyAzdbpEuZHmZiJvo8tNYFHw-A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b2e47f8f28349050d9254d4"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/ooEE-nelw7-qgsgIWgaCduhBzXE>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-netconf-rfc5539bis-07
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 18:30:30 -0000

Ignore both the comments. Apparently, I was looking at an older (-04)
version of the draft.

On Mon Jan 26 2015 at 2:27:54 AM Juergen Schoenwaelder <
j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:30:39AM -0800, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> > [Chair hat off]
> >
> > I support the publication of this draft. The draft has been well written
> and believe it is ready for LC.
> >
> > In addition to the two references that Mehmet mentioned, please
> address/update the reference to draft-ietf-netmod-snmp-cfg to RFC 7407.
>
> I am confused since draft-ietf-netconf-rfc5539bis-07 does not
> reference draft-ietf-netmod-snmp-cfg except in appendix B which is
> marked as "to be removed by RFC Editor before publication".
>
> > [Chair hat on]
> >
> > Separately, and only because it is mentioned in this document, we need
> to clean up the description around how the username is extracted from a
> certificate. This can happen in the netconf-server draft. The three
> documents talk about a algorithm to extract the username, but the only
> option that is clear (at least to me) is when the username is ’specified’.
> >
>
> If the text in rfc5539bis is not clear, we should try to improve
> it. Do you think the text in rfc5539bis is unclear or are you talking
> about the netconf-server document specifically? (Note that I will
> address Martin's comments regarding the algorithm, which however are
> minor changes.)
>
> /js
>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>