Re: [netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-23: (with COMMENT)

"Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com> Wed, 14 March 2018 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <cwildes@cisco.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 D2D5B126CC4; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 14:02:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 7EIVe2BVYxo1; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 14:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14AB91201FA; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 14:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4672; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1521061333; x=1522270933; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=Vdk1M50atCI3PABfDEHiwLFRPHVejQCdLrTh+c61I8k=; b=NcUXG5FenuA7K/ULlfhxUKOVor3lLfl01+GIR8HsrbFY/tCydGm2+Qrj 9jGXnkrGVIAn6fJUegUZ3i5v95aSMf7QUD3OtqF5DH8mHH7yDVfmEL0W3 PgKXcWoBxNcsVvBumGSdoPatPozzBYNjK60CBvqgrfXO4IBoA7yhCH4kh g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0APAQCsjKla/5pdJa1eGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQcBAQEBAYNQgVUoCoNGihqNdIIDgRaUNoITCoFZgzcCGoMMITQYAQIBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQECayiFJgEFIxFFEAIBCBgCAiYCAgIwFRACBAENBYUYrgaCJohkggyBDYQhg?= =?us-ascii?q?hSBVIF8gniFBoMIMIIyBI1xjGMJApBegWOENYMRhTKRJQIREwGBKwEeOIFScBV?= =?us-ascii?q?kAYIYgmWOCneOTYEYAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,307,1517875200"; d="scan'208";a="83597931"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Mar 2018 21:02:12 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-007.cisco.com (xch-aln-007.cisco.com [173.36.7.17]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w2EL2C2o008834 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:02:12 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) by XCH-ALN-007.cisco.com (173.36.7.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:02:11 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) by XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:02:11 -0500
From: "Clyde Wildes (cwildes)" <cwildes@cisco.com>
To: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "netmod-chairs@ietf.org" <netmod-chairs@ietf.org>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, "draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model@ietf.org>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-23: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHTtrYcV91jBgWxxkacsH0dPPey+KPHCvYAgAB3pgCAANUSgIAIPiiA
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:02:11 +0000
Message-ID: <66EF138D-AF95-4D1A-A16C-476E21169226@cisco.com>
References: <152049713585.21371.5349464317624337106.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <B6CDE5F2-9986-4D47-B2A5-5178514533B7@cisco.com> <6300eca8-3c6a-3837-c22a-3d67785fb968@nostrum.com> <56b08532-c309-a783-1dbd-76b0fd86e847@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <56b08532-c309-a783-1dbd-76b0fd86e847@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.20.145.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <C5BAD1A2FCE5B849AB3D56E78694EC34@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/3xKsSOq8zVML3b6S5ax1jnyV314>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-23: (with COMMENT)
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: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:02:15 -0000

Adam,

A new draft will be published soon that addresses your concern and I have used your wording.

Thanks,

Clyde



On 3/9/18, 6:09 AM, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>; wrote:

    On 3/9/2018 2:27 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
    > On 3/8/18 12:18 PM, Clyde Wildes (cwildes) wrote:
    >> Adam,
    >>
    >> An earlier version of the model (draft-ietf-netmod-syslog-model-08 
    >> and prior) included “terminal” as a syslog destination which 
    >> addresses your requirement below:
    >>
    >>              +--rw terminal {terminal-action}?
    >>              |  +--rw all-terminals!
    >>              |  |  +--rw log-selector
    >>              |  |     +--rw (selector-facility)
    >>              |  |     |  +--:(no-log-facility)
    >>              |  |     |  |  +--rw no-facilities?   empty
    >>              |  |     |  +--:(log-facility)
    >>              |  |     |     +--rw log-facility* [facility]
    >>              |  |     |        +--rw facility             union
    >>              |  |     |        +--rw severity             union
    >>              |  |     |        +--rw severity-operator? enumeration 
    >> {selector-sevop-config}?
    >>              |  |     +--rw pattern-match?   string 
    >> {selector-match-config}?
    >>              |  +--rw terminal* [name] 
    >> {terminal-facility-user-logging-config}?
    >>              |     +--rw name            string
    >>              |     +--rw log-selector
    >>              |        +--rw (selector-facility)
    >>              |        |  +--:(no-log-facility)
    >>              |        |  |  +--rw no-facilities?   empty
    >>              |        |  +--:(log-facility)
    >>              |        |     +--rw log-facility* [facility]
    >>              |        |        +--rw facility             union
    >>              |        |        +--rw severity             union
    >>              |        |        +--rw severity-operator? enumeration 
    >> {selector-sevop-config}?
    >>              |        +--rw pattern-match?   string 
    >> {selector-match-config}?
    >>
    >> A consensus of the group was that it was best to remove this 
    >> destination in the model as a simplification, and that vendors that 
    >> supported same could add it back through an augmentation.
    >
    > Thanks for the history -- that's useful to know. I don't have any 
    > desire to re-open a settled issue, so please don't read my response as 
    > a request to go back to the older, more complex model.
    >
    > My concern now is that the unstated assumption above isn't indicated 
    > in the document; and absent such a treatment, I fear that some vendors 
    > may do what you expect (extend the model), while some may do what I 
    > mentioned (expect terminal syslog output to be provisioned via a 
    > special filesystem node using the "file" subtree). This ambiguity 
    > doesn't seem ideal.
    >
    > I would suggest that the document have text specifically indicating 
    > that terminal output with requirements more complex than the console 
    > subtree currently provides are expected to be supported via vendor 
    > extensions rather than handled via the file subtree.
    That makes sense.
    
    Regards, B.
    >
    > /a
    >
    > .
    >