Re: [netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-10.txt

David Bannister <dpb@netflix.com> Thu, 16 March 2017 18:23 UTC

Return-Path: <dbannister@netflix.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2374129876 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=netflix.com
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 plQhyLK3KtgF for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:23:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x22d.google.com (mail-ua0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3F7E129881 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:23:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id f54so31464717uaa.1 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:23:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netflix.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WXOT9xabqD16feURRyeTJH0lpjtJVzBrct8Kw5R0INc=; b=OEQkzfIHfWSlupktjbJYOz3Jl0pNPzBiT79g2V4TgNqKi3vaCItshOSdjLmMAaftlN GSyV/jStFfxYZ1MEz3ol+2m4TtpJ1c0d7iuKOSX9uY1zfcNp6ZelJdNXvaO9C25Hm4sY TPRXj47U04bkhy2wk66LJrnaHwrS9QOOKcgV8=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WXOT9xabqD16feURRyeTJH0lpjtJVzBrct8Kw5R0INc=; b=FztH9euF6T2nKlt0NYB5iD2XibHqttK0eQSTeXwU19GGHiZHUCI4KICxzxWHzq7+a/ cZKzQaFnxfqopG0/LZA6pFml8BC37K2mRAy4iGTShCIW4PkWCkJymFyndfy1iU9YLNpR CS1SjnsF6wUVSUkiPgsq1C7PjdyAa05TgcF8lfpT8Qv4HMXya8EAVcwsPmnwfdzt5xaN 4c2znjHgTYtYe0lPBIDV0xBSnScAhvSBIvgbAENtUOkPxOkvFOJ70XIQhFnUVDmlguol PzJBxVcQpx5Q55CE2zTKXfCdQ1deHRPxhTTeRxEbgHMB/XgCcBWsLgqRTH2ueBYK0Bc4 05rw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0v5xhb+J0owlVfCtJuafb6JzEjMsz7rPhMu+FkDDnW7d1afVyOxz9abGO0wC2FwnU7gyPOiRlvno1AfMdP
X-Received: by 10.176.24.218 with SMTP id d26mr4713811uah.117.1489688627878; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.31.33.72 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:23:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4D50BFD4-0E59-4DF8-BEC9-0D9BE50F5BA6@juniper.net>
References: <148939875845.17039.4017763838166134753.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <FB5820F3-D98B-40B3-A427-22F6D2B9BD6B@gmail.com> <4D50BFD4-0E59-4DF8-BEC9-0D9BE50F5BA6@juniper.net>
From: David Bannister <dpb@netflix.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:23:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPhzzabCTBNusa-T08G9x7fv4-vK7t70rAXPLZVa1qcfOUeXNg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
Cc: Dean Bogdanovic <ivandean@gmail.com>, NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403043548507e13f4054add299c
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/18j7SUPZ9nCROwsIpTNjpz5zgws>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-10.txt
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 01:35:42 -0000

There were no changes to the model so my concerns remain the same.
Augmentation is not a scalable solution when dealing with a mutli-vendor or
in some instances a multi-business-unit environment.  The 'newco' example
in the draft illustrates this problem.  The IETF produces a 'standard' for
an ACL draft which is so sparse in nature that it must be augmented by each
vendor.  In the best case this gives me a unique model per vendor because
we know the vendors are not going to get together to define the missing
pieces.  The vendors will use a variety of mechanisms to complete the model
from using a script to build their models from source code, handling the
missing pieces as arbitrary code (anyxml), or everything as a string.  Then
there is the worse case where a vendor has no internal standardization (you
know who you are) and their own product lines will not align into a common
model.  The object here, for me, is to get to a single model for all
vendors barring a unique feature that belongs to one vendor in which case
augmentation is acceptable.

Could you add to this in the future and rev up the RFC?  Sure.  However, I
am not sure what value that brings to the community.  In its current form I
would not ask any of my vendors to implement this draft.  Instead I would
push them towards the OpenConfig ACL model.

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:

> Hi David,
>
>
>
> Can you please confirm that the additional examples address your concern?
> And, if not, please
>
> explain if there is any reason why what you're looking for couldn't be
> added or augmented in
>
> in the future.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kent // shepherd
>
>
>
> On 3/13/17, 5:57 AM, "netmod on behalf of Dean Bogdanovic" <
> netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of ivandean@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Here is the new version of the ACL draft. Since December and some
> additional comments about the ACL model, I spoke with many operators and
> how they use ACLs. I have also received lot of detailed ACL configurations.
> In most cases, the model is easily adapted to the current use cases in
> operations. But to answer the comments, the authors have added a detailed
> example in the addendum section how the model can be extended and how this
> model can be used.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Dean
>
>
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>
>
> *From: *internet-drafts@ietf.org
>
> *Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-10.txt*
>
> *Date: *March 13, 2017 at 10:52:38 AM GMT+1
>
> *To: *<netmod-chairs@ietf.org>rg>, "Kiran Koushik" <kkoushik@cisco.com>om>,
> "Lisa Huang" <lyihuang16@gmail.com>om>, "Dean Bogdanovic" <ivandean@gmail.com>om>,
> "Dana Blair" <dblair@cisco.com>om>, "Kiran Agrahara Sreenivasa" <
> kkoushik@cisco.com>
>
>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-10.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Dean Bogdanovic and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model
> Revision: 10
> Title: Network Access Control List (ACL) YANG Data Model
> Document date: 2017-03-13
> Group: netmod
> Pages: 32
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-
> ietf-netmod-acl-model-10.txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-
> netmod-acl-model/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-10
> Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-
> netmod-acl-model-10
>
> Abstract:
>   This document describes a data model of Access Control List (ACL)
>   basic building blocks.
>
>   Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor)
>
>   This draft contains many placeholder values that need to be replaced
>   with finalized values at the time of publication.  This note
>   summarizes all of the substitutions that are needed.  Please note
>   that no other RFC Editor instructions are specified anywhere else in
>   this document.
>
>   Artwork in this document contains shorthand references to drafts in
>   progress.  Please apply the following replacements
>
>   o  "XXXX" --> the assigned RFC value for this draft.
>
>   o  Revision date in model (Oct 12, 2016) needs to get updated with
>      the date the draft gets approved.  The date also needs to get
>      reflected on the line with <CODE BEGINS>.
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>