Re: [NGO] comments on CANMOD BoF

Phil Shafer wrote:
> Andy Bierman writes:
>> I also expect the WG charter to include a coherent and robust plan
>> for operational security, that includes a standard access control model.
> 
> Please point us to a usable example of a coherent and robust plan.
> Requiring this in the charter for a NETCONF modeling language puts
> the cart before the ameoba.

The NETCONF WG was already tasked with developing a set of
requirements for access control, and this work item was
dropped from the charter.

IMO, this is in the same category as vendors designing protocols
to run over UDP, without any regard for congestion control,
and the IESG won't let them standardize that.  Oh well. Nice try.

I don't have to come up with a complete accepted solution.
Neither does a WG creating a standardized NETCONF content solution.
IMO, the WG charter must have a coherent plan for all aspects
of a secure working NETCONF CM system.  Ignoring access control
completely is not something the IESG should allow in the charter.

> 
> Thanks,
>  Phil
> 
> 
> 

Andy

_______________________________________________
NGO mailing list
NGO@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ngo