IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Tue, 10 December 2013 11:42 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 680651ADBCB for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 03:42:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.501 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 vwSPYu7RMMPn for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 03:42:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8661AD8E1 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 03:42:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1853; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1386675748; x=1387885348; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references: in-reply-to; bh=IKp8V6dNyvS3S/oGbftM/I2h7fKqXrnfY3GULsPZjhc=; b=WJS5CQneKLQ4udgZ7S2QNreOwwu4cH8E1BTNiuzkWBjctOrST0ycqo4s bXzkKKS9r3kaHbB9l00fTqhOcgIGLSf9B3RhQgjJShCUOjN4mp2DbjMYu FE2ZViWqsUE45ZXEjqYkbOe8vJpVJ3yAmAk4K0G57d6eys1XarwJqfPxS 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjMFAMz9plKQ/khN/2dsb2JhbABZgwc4iS+vcU6BHxZ0giYBAQQBAQFrChELBAEcFg8JAwIBAgEVMAYNBgIBAYd+DcBiEwSPDIQzA5gUhkWLToMqOw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,865,1378857600"; d="scan'208,217";a="1954894"
Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Dec 2013 11:42:27 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.86] (ams-bclaise-8915.cisco.com [10.60.67.86]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rBABgNJU011983 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:42:24 GMT
Message-ID: <52A6FE1F.9060507@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 12:42:23 +0100
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: NETMOD Working Group <netmod@ietf.org>
References: <52A5CCD2.7030903@cisco.com> <52A5EBA1.50802@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <52A5EBA1.50802@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050802050809080601010309"
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 10 Dec 2013 11:42:35 -0000

Dear all,

Answering my own question:
- Do we need the NTP version, 3 or 4, as a config field?

Did some investigations.
Apparently it's not needed because there is an indication of the version 
during the NTP message exchange.

Regards, Benoit

>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email