Re: [netmod] ACL draft issues found during shepherd writeup

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Tue, 27 February 2018 09:20 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@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 830FA1241FC; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 01:20:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.509
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.509 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_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, 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 yKODVX1kEpY7; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 01:20:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A83D61201F2; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 01:20:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=20310; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1519723211; x=1520932811; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=sJPRN1MUF2BvnyCOFsD18MkAzasQfwmB3OuOJRGXrMg=; b=EY+qqXzfDAWlLiF+AqM3+euqrCBqSKhBWByLy/lZMNcjDRe/zWV8vPvo 7Mka7NVCVv6M+Blu7jw6857zLccCftbJwiBoMgaGc9SAcCn2O3lIeodcj u44kebE0th4GejYM9V/8xJ4Y+UzF0WDHhqWF2j7QDJP3y6G+wvIYlIqw0 s=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 488
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,400,1515456000"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="2264912"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Feb 2018 09:20:09 +0000
Received: from [10.61.241.233] ([10.61.241.233]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w1R9K8NR025594; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:20:08 GMT
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Cc: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>, "draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model@ietf.org>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com>
References: <14BA9086-69D4-4BAF-A7C7-0EB1F3F400BB@juniper.net> <2864E0CF-D038-4FDA-B69C-FD43F486BF17@gmail.com> <8D3773A8-ECA6-406A-B28D-6DD44F951F10@juniper.net> <02D4541E-FF83-41AD-A026-A1AB857E0A62@gmail.com> <1a4a3f5d-5211-8b13-308e-3b124c836135@cisco.com> <DD6A8E90-53DE-422F-AB91-A3547298A135@gmail.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <d7bef5fa-b790-2562-c17b-7ef5dc4f3307@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:20:07 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DD6A8E90-53DE-422F-AB91-A3547298A135@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6A3nMBxns1nFmaUWbieSjjjVtGmb07v0d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/G8uqP15DgMtXbFyZI2MtjaoDPaE>
Subject: Re: [netmod] ACL draft issues found during shepherd writeup
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: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:20:13 -0000

This edit doesn't seem correct to me because now we have a choice with a
single case, with range having been removed.  Can we please revert and
proceed?


On 26.02.18 20:24, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> A pull request to address LC, shepherd, this and the other comments,
> including derived-from(), can be reviewed here:
>
> https://github.com/netmod-wg/acl-model/pull/24
>
> Thanks.
>
>> On Feb 26, 2018, at 12:15 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com
>> <mailto:lear@cisco.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 26.02.18 06:55, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  PS: And this is not a shepherd directive, but I found the whole 
>>>>>      "source-port-range-or-operator" syntax clumsy.  I'm surprised
>>>>>      it didn't look something like:
>>>>>
>>>>>          OLD
>>>>>                <source-port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>                   <port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>                     <range>
>>>>>                       <lower-port>16384</lower-port>
>>>>>                       <upper-port>65535</upper-port>
>>>>>                     </range>
>>>>>                   </port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>                </source-port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>
>>>>>                <source-port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>                  <port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>                    <operator>
>>>>>                      <operator>eq</operator>
>>>>>                      <port>21</port>
>>>>>                    </operator>
>>>>>                  </port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>                </source-port-range-or-operator>
>>>>>
>>>>>          NEW
>>>>>
>>>>>                <source-port>
>>>>>                  <range>
>>>>>                    <lower>16384</lower>
>>>>>                    <upper>65535</upper>
>>>>>                  </range>
>>>>>                </source-port>
>>>>>
>>>>>                <source-port>
>>>>>                  <operator>
>>>>>                    <operator>eq</operator>
>>>>>                    <port>21</port>
>>>>>                  </operator>
>>>>>                </source-port>
>>>>>
>>>>  
>>>> Did you try making the change in the model to see if it work? It
>>>> will complain that <range> is already used within the container and
>>>> that it cannot be repeated (for destination-port).
>>>>
>>>> <KENT> No, I did not, nor do I intend to get that deep into it. 
>>>> But I recall that Kristian made the same comment before, and was
>>>> making pull requests before, so maybe he can suggest something?
>>>
>>> Kristian’s suggestion requires changing the module. It is not an
>>> editorial change. And that change will have an impact on the MUD
>>> draft, which has been sent for publication. 
>>>
>>
>> As it happens, we found a bug in our augment statements, and so we
>> will need to rev one more time.  If the change can be made quickly, I
>> can live with it.
>>
>> Eliot
>
> Mahesh Jethanandani
> mjethanandani@gmail.com <mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>
>