Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-24: (with COMMENT)
"Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> Wed, 02 November 2016 00:23 UTC
Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.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 9A8DF129959; Tue, 1 Nov 2016 17:23:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 9gVgaZl9MqGt; Tue, 1 Nov 2016 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 A65E41298B1; Tue, 1 Nov 2016 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.21] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id uA20NSYN056116 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 1 Nov 2016 19:23:29 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.21]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 19:23:29 -0500
Message-ID: <7EEAE7E3-906D-4FED-B4BF-0BA44452E7E9@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <D43E7868.8712E%acee@cisco.com>
References: <147803154180.23820.9214684669050491573.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <D43E7868.8712E%acee@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/T-lpZsMcE1UI7GbxQNi2ZMO97DM>
Cc: "netmod-chairs@ietf.org" <netmod-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg@ietf.org>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg.all@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-24: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 02 Nov 2016 00:23:34 -0000
On 1 Nov 2016, at 15:55, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > Hi Ben, > > On 11/1/16, 4:19 PM, "Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> wrote: > >> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg-24: No Objection >> >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut >> this >> introductory paragraph, however.) >> >> >> Please refer to >> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. >> >> >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-routing-cfg/ >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Should the reference to 6536. Be normative? > > I certainly don’t think so. This is simply an informative reference > describing the NETCONF access control model. The model in the draft is > in > no way dependent on this model. I can't call myself a NETCONF expert--but if you use the model in this draft over NETCONF, are there other access control models one might realistically use? (Noting that NETCONF itself is a normative reference.) Ben.
- [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-iet… Ben Campbell
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Ben Campbell
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft… Ben Campbell