Re: [netmod] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-14: (with COMMENT)

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <> Mon, 13 April 2020 16:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD9C3A19AB; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 09:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id srLVehKBDdi4; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 09:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DEB83A19A7; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 09:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id h200so201920vke.3; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 09:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Jd3omu4/uTHBhwboOcxYryvdOCqESyaoO60SnRtIqEY=; b=AAeAcCOTZn3/9y/W0338lNnYrJaGRtO/lbO9u4xG4u+DEFMI490TkkkDGRu0Y3ti/2 7maj/d5OC3w3DVChZckoiXKJMxUo/3dfdeqeF5C+Xlh77X0J+SdWVYbdDJDYvZ/7Vn8w n1+P5kUk8BuImOwh3htKJgNDQ5vzhSnNYNLLVt/un7raJ/32SlrYAWccYjAnUGWyDf/G n7Gxejy1TmL/f8vbmx4KmnoBH9KxVSubj1q9b4uj1FRqMilqBEl+gTpLnY+OdPwp4MaI neMRUbTNSFtufkWILlk3NaReyYn0aj3SxPCtr5v/ZNNzy6yjHoETJ/1khk3EN3a2vZ2c nBNg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Jd3omu4/uTHBhwboOcxYryvdOCqESyaoO60SnRtIqEY=; b=OECF/PbJzooXt29ouZnmmzD2wtXhM88+9YJEiztku88EOHpIH+Wy3H/oi6AZNQ9Wg4 7nhWFye6UDGxsEjZwHPftnfpeXtXaIOrU/p4Fs+5bvIx8U9YfyVTgKlXMzC4yUfs0Hkq pEyNxlpfcGKX9eeysOSjYJSRynZppxL2fyTEoRueRBjfXRq19UZuGrG3+eBQ7/g8PT4a wZO84e/QLMzi5GbYY4dphGHY6YjLlUFuyTgOfb+LeaomY9MD8LzgzkKBkgtFP+B9qiKA ka92D4nPilID6eyMS4ROuMm+/L1lhrorwbb0LBFn2jG8WpWGMTdj5uS0SR4VfcspY83U VGtg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pua/rEjMo2fMQ5rkLfds+qbSfyZh7FdxnWA2tlRnDFQ6aropxHso PZ/mY6CKd0/UTipQqwhg1Ap4MJWG7Q1EFYCwT0E=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLOr6mSy4V9zPCEowzOmYeC6cSVaO+xsVd5p0myDHrIFvaqGO4NShOI1msm7BX6K9qdcC+gHgX8XQpyAIPB9SY=
X-Received: by 2002:ac5:c3ce:: with SMTP id t14mr2158094vkk.60.1586795941830; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 09:39:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 09:38:50 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Qin Wu <>
Cc: The IESG <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, Kent Watsen <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000071a50c05a32eb863"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-factory-default-14: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 16:39:05 -0000

Hi Qin,

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 8:12 PM Qin Wu <> wrote:

> Section 2:
> * "All security sensitive data (i.e., private keys, passwords, etc.)
> SHOULD be overwritten ..." presents a choice.  Why would an implementer not
> do this? *
> [Qin]: This was outcome of the discussion, see the following link:
> i.e., folks concerned to restore security data and password to default
> value, that's we introduce clean requirements to address this concern.
"Implementors SHOULD reboot the device or otherwise restart processes
> needed to bootstrap it." leads me to the same question.
> [Qin]: To make default configuration take effect, the device reboot is
> recommended, but in some case, the IP address reachability of the device
> may be lost, therefore bootstrapping may be needed.

For both of these I suggest mentioning in the document the reason it's a
SHOULD and not a MUST, i.e., describe a situation when it might be okay to
do something other than what it says.

(Reminder: These are not blocking comments, just suggestions.)

Thanks for considering these suggestions.