Re: [Netconf] Adoption poll for crypto-types and trust-anchors

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Wed, 02 May 2018 08:08 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88CF7124319 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 May 2018 01:08:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 DkD4yVwIaxA6 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 May 2018 01:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0508F1242F5 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 May 2018 01:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (h-80-27.A165.priv.bahnhof.se [212.85.80.27]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46D091AE012C; Wed, 2 May 2018 10:08:34 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 02 May 2018 10:08:34 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <20180502.100834.1889542130886603023.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: kwatsen@juniper.net
Cc: netconf@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <D972EDFC-AEF6-4BC7-82A9-BE1DA350FDAA@juniper.net>
References: <D972EDFC-AEF6-4BC7-82A9-BE1DA350FDAA@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 24.5 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/yfiJ5yvVwzuhLdd0FelHSrNqZRc>
Subject: Re: [Netconf] Adoption poll for crypto-types and trust-anchors
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 02 May 2018 08:08:36 -0000

Hi,

I support the adoption of these two drafts.


/martin

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:
> 
> [I'll get the ball rolling, please, others chime in too]
> 
> I support the adoption of these two drafts to replace the existing keystore draft.
> 
> Regarding the "certificate-expiration" notification defined in ietf-crypto-types, I would like to discuss removing it, or moving it to be a descendent of the "certificates-grouping" grouping (also in ietf-crypto-types) and maybe also place a copy of the notification in the ietf-trust-anchors module.  That said, I don't like having several otherwise identical notifications in different namespaces, but I do like how the server can incrementally add support for expirations on a feature-by-feature basis.
> 
> Kent // contributor
> 
> 
> ===== original message =====
> 
> This is the start of a *two* week poll for adopting the following two drafts as working group documents, specifically to replace draft-ietf-netconf-keystore, which would be removed as a working group document: 
> 
>   draft-kwatsen-netconf-crypto-types-00
>   draft-kwatsen-netconf-trust-anchors-00
> 
> This call for adoption is the result of the Keystore draft presentation given in London.  When the various options were discussed, most preferred to move forward with these two drafts, as opposed to looking to do more factoring or extending to scope to include things not needed by our various client/server drafts.  No one expressed interest in moving forward with draft-ietf-netconf-keystore.  While we could separately confirm this result again on the list, we believe that an adoption call more efficiently achieves two goals at once.
> 
> Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or "no/do not support".  If indicating no, please state your reservations with the document.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.
> 
> Kent (and Mahesh and Ignas)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_netconf&d=DwICAg&c=HAkYuh63rsuhr6Scbfh0UjBXeMK-ndb3voDTXcWzoCI&r=9zkP0xnJUvZGJ9EPoOH7Yhqn2gsBYaGTvjISlaJdcZo&m=qXS002RrOOkzqTDm70cWjg7eJeWqtpC_anWUcc9a_3I&s=1W689R8ht-U3FoffJ5uTT24SAPRtiQ9a9B3VxQxM_Wg&e=
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Netconf mailing list
> Netconf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf
>