Re: [OPSAWG] Minutes for 104

Warren

Thanks for the info.

It seems to me that
draft-turner-ccmib-02
is doing for SMI what a number of I-D are struggling (IMHO) to do for
NETCONF/YANG right now.

Apart from the overall objective e.g.
"it describes managed objects used to
   manage key management implementations including asymmetric keys,
   symmetric keys, trust anchors, and cryptographic-related firmware"
they seem to have little or nothing in common; and I know which approach
seems, to a non-cryptographer like me, to have the right resonance.

It is hard to be specific because
draft-turner-ccmib-02
is disastrously short of descriptive text, not fit to be an RFC IMHO.
It would be a shame if it were to proceed in its present form just as it
would be a shame if the contents were not used to inform those working
on the NETCONF/NETMOD equivalents.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren Kumari" warren@kumari.net
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2019 4:37 PM

This was largely a “here is a document which we want to send through the
ISE, does the WG want it instead / anyone have any objections?”

He and I had decided that it was polite to check with the WG, even
though
we were fairly sure the WG would not want it...

W

On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 10:25 AM Joe Clarke (jclarke) <jclarke@cisco.com>
wrote:

>
>
> > On May 8, 2019, at 06:12, tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > I am struck by
> >
> > "CCMIB Sean Turner 5 minutes
> > Sean wants no one to comment and no one commented"
> >
> > which seems consistent; no identifier for the whatever-it-is and so
> > no-one said anything!
>
> I didn’t know how to summarize that any differently.  That’s more or
less
> what he said at the mic.  But his presentation is there for the
details of
> what he wants.
>
> Joe
>
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com>
> > To: <opsawg@ietf.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2019 10:52 PM
> > Subject: [OPSAWG] Minutes for 104
> >
> >
> >> After a long delay I have posted the draft minutes from the IETF
104
> > opsawg/Ops Area session.  I took these from notes I did in Etherpad
as
> > well as the video recording on YouTube.  I missed one Huawei name at
the
> > mic with the NTF draft, but I think I captured most everything else.
> >>
> >> Please review and Tianran or I know what we need to change.
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >>
> >
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/104/materials/minutes-104-opsawg-00
> >>
> >> Joe
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OPSAWG mailing list
> >> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
>
--
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea
in
the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of
pants.
   ---maf