Re: [netmod] 6087bis - Security Considerations template

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Mon, 06 August 2018 19:21 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.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 F394F130F1C for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 VJAA0Y5HRA9N for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::231]) (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 6B58E130EDF for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id 203-v6so11454335ljj.13 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 Aug 2018 12:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MYPBXQOIzV9lyF+1AuchaVXaSaTmnFtf4FpdwVKltI8=; b=T1jqVDZARao5nSSDQUH6RkEQRaZimtySM7QruEqLowlykRlmuUyYG6c3w8gGUayc2n QAz5GV5fL0i6/TcO0kq4ITbDBw09BxY7DuSLCTDGp4ont3qso9flmxCC7hmCL3GpHL8K MA5sHcHsv16JndIdTSkdWysjS44K/gzU6QWNGyAK/TqDBmpY+vJqJKjEHaUnn30W9cVm GZJ0tTTPdfmms6bILpUQrgxekPdd6N9On/Vh1sfEZN2KWmFgqVZ0l54G3v6fz7Riqjxc Mq7oFwg4QaENz4lM0CWraohqQ3Yd4WcufvgrvzpNM9Kg37rVyy8gnA6jhUXBCmDD2pxm 6Pdg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MYPBXQOIzV9lyF+1AuchaVXaSaTmnFtf4FpdwVKltI8=; b=qwqsHtQVz8Y4Q8Iys1IhDYnCpFVNGepNHp97uhArvjLp72XNMfclpD+T4qIO2YwYc/ mbWTvDnPLUNh89o5HlY3TV270qiBfNRBhm/IZnIfl93CznEWJwxEwmV4WNNDI1IdiBXb TvnRh7udybbqZE6tkRbERWzT23vADykrRB4bGjBG7rbDC8QS1EMGfjW+K4GKnoqpCOFl sR8v6pmb+bKhrv1Hu1yeeyMJ6mkXSJOsmgjYeoUABfv59DXTCgTdOrQtMTjE0uGFz6bh h8TzY0qkZVZ7t2vGyjprqxZ1tUkOdWniSkkuEeLtKu3lK0+xtLiYI4SU7/NQjfkUAhWf wiKQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFmd/hznz5afxo8OLfEfuSgfdnqiRmVFvLEfUOb/+TIPhehrACZ 3w2Qfs080rjpJ0MxEGoUiX41+H3BCK+Akc+DW3tTS2PJ
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeVyBPUT43zRfJToNw3MK9a6S8pEapzEUoY/Xgk0L1rjqWtyU+HWu4Jo4WM6nAySUlt8F26SThglt5BJkMiCT4=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:1dc8:: with SMTP id w69-v6mr14431835lje.110.1533583312603; Mon, 06 Aug 2018 12:21:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a19:aa46:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:21:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180806.205046.1122451156895376424.mbj@tail-f.com>
References: <87muvjges7.fsf@nic.cz> <20180806.205046.1122451156895376424.mbj@tail-f.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:21:51 -0700
Message-ID: <CABCOCHSOZrBXFooP7jr78nvTNwitmo118qPQw-5sMvSTB6v1qQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000094dfb60572c930c4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/pEwvR3CACVbFPh4C0nqfgVbHZ1w>
Subject: Re: [netmod] 6087bis - Security Considerations template
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 19:21:57 -0000

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>; wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>; wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Shawn Emery reviewed draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-10 and made this
> > editorial comment:
> >
> > OLD:
> >
> > These are the subtrees and data nodes and their
> sensitivity/vulnerability:
> >
> > NEW:
> >
> > The following should be considered for subtrees/data nodes and their
> > corresponding sensitivity/vulnerability:
> >
>


I do not think the new text is better.
I think 6087bis is already stuck waiting for AD approval for a tiny change
to the security template.



> > However, the OLD fomulation comes from RFC 6087, so perhaps this change
> > should be applied in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis in the first
> > place. The NEW formulation indeed looks better to me.
>
> What is the WG's opinion on this proposed text change?  6087bis is in
> AUTH48 so if it needs to be changed it must happen now.
>
> Of course, we can update
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines even when
> 6087bis has been published.
>
> If we don't want to update the template, I don't think we should
> update the schema mount draft either.
>
>
> /martin
>
>
>
Andy


>
>
> >
> > Lada
> >
> > --
> > Ladislav Lhotka
> > Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > netmod@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>