IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ntp-yang-data-model-10

Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 06 February 2021 04:59 UTC

Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC623A0C4E; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:59:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 m3ESJjzmePpd; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:59:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-x12a.google.com (mail-il1-x12a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12a]) (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 CB2AF3A0C49; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 20:59:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-x12a.google.com with SMTP id d6so7817434ilo.6; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 20:59:17 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=s4zm1oEJm8/EI7vfrDcjtNuKTSkbwV1KgwcFCaVQvMc=; b=sw4kCMRSCf8mqmID7QLrVLEl0kCrLP7WY6UAE4X81J0+lp29VfjoMjMYCe1DRsYArU fxS7HauNkvI2dEMSVWamSLpv/hfS5sejVgrojJ5vfpsCHPWSe0ry0DPwUwn5PGFC/dNU ObRCNB3JsGLp+2ys3bhlGkyc4kGdw4fHP2xFn4D1wmkxqHpbnBWoBoE3Rpsz0THBJBSR p2tqLrrifK4HkdwLY94LwkwQsv9WR7Bgs0pSyPZw7EfZ37l9ZAHvi7XLr0z/ATjCYwmD 31KLR+T8bFYIjmoNQMgAZT5DGJBqO6VMXD4fVATToTMzEH2CD17RwZcl0z9wKRAiDve1 oz2A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=s4zm1oEJm8/EI7vfrDcjtNuKTSkbwV1KgwcFCaVQvMc=; b=AgWdTpfymXJXggoMWaKcWU5TCqLu23GnYr9sleQzysx4jezMX/NKLty2DLimjnSzhz 8o9Kj60fA+MFPiY7suSQtROZZ4b0b/bNZnqbGKqLrmiqXQGQIlUOGziP7jGhBjmBZxuz ZpUSb99zalGO7V5b1T0B19Ns1isa/9FL6ZTza2Veew7AZs1z4XTKO+7UPfGY5fcZthYW /pvRtYAsTf+Ymk8SZtN3oorDog4NNtCryg9Uo/oQf1DThQmBKupbbBy9wCWM+Zo3JjMe JInFXpB1SbkpqsJ+c9gzvKNXs/oq0B4lW3AVtZg7xj68orJErxu2t8w2yULJ+FIjsK9/ rGnA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5334GWweZp/TDwdEbiqiWveOfd07tCEIbk8CtN+OAfLMAeS1pEh6 szAYa0NgDK/pBmDFgSGO2QFduDP+cpaiDN1vEpX/GeKQWrujdQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw9DqSi7c80+bWE3ABdLm0cRCubNtwurYxMnp53F61kl92YsNUzU1pWdc2yOWbX08Qvy2y5zyhpo7kTFlrXMaU=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:c24b:: with SMTP id k11mr6916339ilo.276.1612587556589; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 20:59:16 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <161257773814.7967.4285334263331418527@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <161257773814.7967.4285334263331418527@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2021 10:28:40 +0530
Message-ID: <CAB75xn4h82_1=0fTe8KZ_ZpM4_PT6+gNVs1v7ovcSKusY=Hwew@mail.gmail.com>
To: Takeshi Takahashi <takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp>
Cc: secdir <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ntp-yang-data-model.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/EWqeF_v5Q7X8ZN_NmRI4eGby-bY>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ntp-yang-data-model-10
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2021 04:59:23 -0000

Hi Takeshi,

Thanks for your review.

The confusion might be between Network Access Control Lists (ACLs) and
NETCONF Access Control Model (NACM).

I can tighten up the text so that this is clear. See
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=draft-ietf-ntp-yang-data-model-10&url2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dhruvdhody/ietf/master/draft-ietf-ntp-yang-data-model-11.txt

Thanks!
Dhruv

On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 7:45 AM Takeshi Takahashi via Datatracker
<noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Takeshi Takahashi
> Review result: Ready
>
> The security consideration section is written well.
> I have one minor comment.
> The security consideration section discusses the necessity of access control by
> referencing RFC 8341. The access control feature was also discussed in Section
> 5, but the section refers RFC 5905 and RFC 8519. Since they are both dealing
> with the necessity of access control, it would be nicer if the security
> consideration section discusses the need for access control with the same (at
> least one same) reference.
>
>
>

v2.19.0 | Report a Bug | By Email