Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-15

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Kent and Mahesh and Sonal,

Thanks very much for working on this draft.  I have noted one problem
that I think needs correcting.  I come prepared with a diff.

The current model has {source,dest}-port-or-range hanging off ipv4 or
ipv6.  This is a transport parameter and is not appropriate for
protocols that do not use ports (ie, ICMP, ESP, etc).  A better locale
would be to hang these components underneath l4 underneath their
respective tcp and udp branches.

Because this is so basic a function, I propose that this *not* be
included in match-on-tcp or match-on-udp.  Instead, the contents of both
tcp and udp be moved to new containers "tcp-all" and "udp-all",
respectively, and the ports hang as peers to that.  Thus, if a very
simple device can understand TCP and UDP ports but cannot understand
more detailed information, that is supported.

 And so from a tree perspective, it would look like this:


       |        |  +--rw (l4)?
       |        |  |  +--:(tcp)
       |        |  |  |  +--rw tcp
       |        |  |  |     +--rw source-port-range-or-operator
       |        |  |  |     |  +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(range)
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw lower-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw upper-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(operator)
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw operator?     operator
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw port          inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     +--rw destination-port-range-or-operator
       |        |  |  |     |  +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(range)
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw lower-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw upper-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(operator)
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw operator?     operator
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw port          inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     +--rw tcp-all {match-on-tcp}?
       |        |  |  |        +--rw sequence-number?          uint32
       |        |  |  |        +--rw acknowledgement-number?   uint32
       |        |  |  |        +--rw data-offset?              uint8
       |        |  |  |        +--rw reserved?                 uint8
       |        |  |  |        +--rw flags?                    bits
       |        |  |  |        +--rw window-size?              uint16
       |        |  |  |        +--rw urgent-pointer?           uint16
       |        |  |  |        +--rw options?                  uint32
       |        |  |  +--:(udp)
       |        |  |  |  +--rw udp
       |        |  |  |     +--rw source-port-range-or-operator
       |        |  |  |     |  +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(range)
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw lower-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw upper-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(operator)
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw operator?     operator
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw port          inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     +--rw destination-port-range-or-operator
       |        |  |  |     |  +--rw (port-range-or-operator)?
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(range)
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw lower-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     |  +--rw upper-port    inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     |     +--:(operator)
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw operator?     operator
       |        |  |  |     |        +--rw port          inet:port-number
       |        |  |  |     +--rw udp-all {match-on-udp}?
       |        |  |  |        +--rw length?   uint16


A diff ietf-packet-fields.yang and ietf-access-control-lists.yang is
attached.

Eliot



On 17.01.18 22:55, Kent Watsen wrote:
> All,
>
> This starts a two-week working group last call on
> draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-15.
>
> This working group last call ends on January 31st.
> Please send your comments to the NETMOD mailing list.
>
> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document
> and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome!
> This is useful and important, even from authors.
>
> Also, could the authors, explicitly CC-ed on this email,
> please confirm at this time that they are unaware of
> any IPR related to this draft.
>
> Thank you,
> NETMOD Chairs
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>