Re: [netmod] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model-19: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi,


On 26.09.18 23:20, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>
> For avoidance of confusion, I would suggest replacing "l2," "l3," and "l4" with
> "layer2," "layer3," and "layer4," respectively.

In the context of what is being modeled, there really is no confusion. 
If necessary, I would prefer just an annotation that L2, L3, L4 refer to
layer 2, layer 3, and layer 4, respectively.

Thanks,

Eliot
>
> s/Definitions of action for this ace entry/Definitions of action for this ACE
> entry/
>
> s/Specifies the forwarding action per ace entry/Specifies the forwarding action
> per ACE entry/
>
> Sec 4.2:
>
> "This module imports definitions from Common YANG Data Types [RFC6991]
>    and references IP [RFC0791], ICMP [RFC0792], Definition of the
>    Differentiated Services Field in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers [RFC2474],
>    The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP
>    [RFC3168], , IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture [RFC4007], IPv6
>    Addressing Architecture [RFC4291], A Recommendation for IPv6 Address
>    Text Representation [RFC5952], IPv6 [RFC8200]."
>
> It looks like something is missing from this list, possibly RFC 793.
>
> Sec 5:
>
> In this section or elsewhere it would be nice to see a sentence noting that
> this YANG model allows the configuration of packet logging, which if used would
> additionally warrant protections against unauthorized log access and a logs
> retention policy.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>