IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Netconf] We NEED RESPONSES: WG Last Call ended for:draft-ietf-netconf-4741bis-04.txt

"Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com> Sun, 03 October 2010 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06C93A6D5B for <netconf@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 12:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.375
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.375 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.224, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 JB9QEOCiU5E0 for <netconf@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 12:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.32]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90AEC3A6D16 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 12:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o93JgQv0032465 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 3 Oct 2010 21:42:26 +0200
Received: from demuexc023.nsn-intra.net (demuexc023.nsn-intra.net [10.150.128.36]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o93JgQuS011778; Sun, 3 Oct 2010 21:42:26 +0200
Received: from DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.18]) by demuexc023.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 3 Oct 2010 21:42:26 +0200
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 21:42:25 +0200
Message-ID: <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A640106533B@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net>
In-Reply-To: <20101003172455.GA16616@elstar.local>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Netconf] We NEED RESPONSES: WG Last Call ended for:draft-ietf-netconf-4741bis-04.txt
Thread-Index: ActjH/nHM3Oc0h83TPOAvD3IcmDP7gAEdprA
References: <CB69B162C87647AE97AB749466633F54@BertLaptop> <4C9B3E60.5030000@bwijnen.net> <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A640106532D@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <20101003172455.GA16616@elstar.local>
From: "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2010 19:42:26.0166 (UTC) FILETIME=[1B3D1160:01CB6333]
Cc: Netconf <netconf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] We NEED RESPONSES: WG Last Call ended for:draft-ietf-netconf-4741bis-04.txt
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Configuration WG mailing list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 19:41:34 -0000

> > Section 9. Security Considerations
> >
> > I would suggest to add a few sentences for the EOM handling
> > and the possible thread concerning section 3. It would be
> > interesting to recommend a possible reaction if this happens
> > frequently, e.g. to drop the NETCONF session.
> 
> 4741bis does not have an EOM marker - so how can we discuss it in
> the security considerations?

EOM handling is for sure not part of NETCONF but the possible 
thread concerning EOM handling is. I think security considerations 
section should discuss the related security thread, as we did on 
NETCONF ML with a long mail thread.

Cheers,
Mehmet

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email