Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Wed, 20 December 2017 14:01 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.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 DC6D612785F for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 06:01:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 lS0kjMtHxcfd for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 06:01:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC502126CD6 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 06:01:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3416; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1513778477; x=1514988077; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=c5AxbFUMgDtzK/j049z1afvEhgM5k0C3PtqxAXJnTSU=; b=iAF2jIkzsLmpt64DsFrWYzTeoDnOpyXORewUc52dJBnbOmGx79c/yzPj 2MhVxB7ycmdjShQiU/wZqugDS6Amue6cyqdpGI40ny4demjj/clxV0Vri CI/3umxPqIDfwJ22I6LZA8bzlK8XcLJxZzND2SRo1ug/12QuGYkNNDJDC k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0B0AQAAbDpa/xbLJq1bGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQcBAQEBAYQkdCeEBosVj2qZbQojhRgChVUVAQEBAQEBAQEBayiFJAYjDwE?= =?us-ascii?q?FQRALDgwCJgICVwYNCAEBFooREKRMgieKbQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEaB?= =?us-ascii?q?YEPgnCDaIFpKYMDgy8BhQSCYwWSHJEoiACNLoIXigEkhzyNHoFZiAWBOzUjgU8?= =?us-ascii?q?yGggbFTyCKoJTHIFoQDcBimMBAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.45,432,1508803200"; d="scan'208";a="1048588"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Dec 2017 14:01:14 +0000
Received: from [10.55.221.36] (ams-bclaise-nitro3.cisco.com [10.55.221.36]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id vBKE1EXS000943; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 14:01:14 GMT
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
References: <ad97d611-b647-e72e-3a20-65dd0b9cb06e@cisco.com> <9e66674b-4c6b-94f4-5fb6-4013c390c5db@cisco.com> <20171220.143253.1584852195806955458.mbj@tail-f.com>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <fd46c4ab-5c43-1b61-2b00-ca71f13fc932@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 15:01:14 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171220.143253.1584852195806955458.mbj@tail-f.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/qHQ1YWBD7HC1sTRAak9BKOLwx_U>
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-entity-06
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 20 Dec 2017 14:01:19 -0000

Hi Martin,

Thanks.
Only kept the relevant excerpts.
>
>> - Some objects are read-write in RFC6933:
>>        entPhysicalSerialNum
>>        entPhysicalAlias
>>        entPhysicalAssetID
>>        entPhysicalUris
>>
>> For example, entPhysicalSerialNum being read-write always bothered me.
>> serial-num is now "config false", which is a good news IMO.
> Actually, this was not the intention.  In draft-ietf-netmod-entity-03
> this is configurable.  I missed this in the conversion to NMDA.
Ah. So no good news in this case...
>
>> In the reverse direction, entPhysicalMfgName is read-only in RFC6933,
>> while it's "config true" in draft-ietf-netmod-entity
> Yes, this was added per request from the WG.  See e.g. the thread
> "draft-ietf-netmod-entity issue #13".
Sure. It was mainly an observation.
>
> However, I think that what we have now is probably not correct.  I
> think that all nodes 'serial-num', 'mfg-name', and 'model-name' should
> be config true, and the description of list 'component' updated to
> reflect that all these tree leafs are handled the same way.
>
> I would like to know what the WG thinks about this.
Talking as a contributor this time.
It seems that inventory management is kind of broken when someone can 
change 'serial-num', 'mfg-name', and 'model-name. Now, an attacker who 
could modify YANG objects can do way more damage that playing with 
inventory management. "forwarding" in 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc7277bis-01 comes to mind.
>> -
>> UUIDorZero
>>
>> entPhysicalUUID OBJECT-TYPE
>>      SYNTAX      UUIDorZero
>>      MAX-ACCESS  read-only
>>      STATUS      current
>>      DESCRIPTION
>>              "This object contains identification information
>>              about the physical entity.  The object contains a
>>              Universally Unique Identifier, the syntax of this object
>>              must conform toRFC 4122, Section 4.1
>>              <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4122#section-4.1>;.
>>
>>              A zero-length octet string is returned if no UUID
>>              information is known."
>>
>>
>> The YANG module is:
>>
>>           leaf uuid {
>>             type yang:uuid;
>>             config false;
>>             description
>>               "A Universally Unique Identifier of the component.";
>>             reference "RFC 6933 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6933>;:
>>             entPhysicalUUID";
>>           }
>>
>>
>> Where:
>>
>>   typedef uuid {
>>      type string {
>>        pattern '[0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-'
>>              + '[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}';
>>      }
>>      description
>>       "A Universally Unique IDentifier in the string representation
>>        defined in RFC 4122.  The canonical representation uses
>>        lowercase characters.
>>
>>        The following is an example of a UUID in string representation:
>>        f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf6
>>        ";
>>      reference
>>       "RFC 4122: A Universally Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN
>>                  Namespace";
>>    }
>>
>> Again a difference between the MIB and YANG module to mention in the
>> document?
> I can add, in the description of leaf "uuid":
>
>    "If no UUID information is known for this component, this leaf is
>    not instantiated."
This works.

Thanks, Benoit