Re: [OPSAWG] Deborah Brungard's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-13: (with COMMENT)
"Douglas Gash (dcmgash)" <dcmgash@cisco.com> Sat, 22 June 2019 05:49 UTC
Return-Path: <dcmgash@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2DB7120156; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 22:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 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, 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 header.b=MdYtO3CT; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=hHp6gdgb
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 y4P49mShx1Jk; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 22:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08EAD12014E; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 22:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2830; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1561182557; x=1562392157; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=sDfD1HVQDpVEDEuf8JZsqj2CNxtvn+Y4YlBr40VABG4=; b=MdYtO3CTdv57N+VbP9urZrV/HDmoMXwvPGRZ8MNjCBvxjGiFY0rD05J0 8bOu4/xPcy1hwWSzIRgsYc9vfiastWMu9h3KG5caF/1fPIJIi/gV4aNU2 tYd6hsb9ot619Zogr5psMLgWjarbJpFOAwdpcmpwJulhj9y/WXG+Wf8lf 0=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:pDpaMh0iQdx5exr3smDT+zVfbzU7u7jyIg8e44YmjLQLaKm44pD+JxKHt+51ggrPWoPWo7JfhuzavrqoeFRI4I3J8RVgOIdJSwdDjMwXmwI6B8vQBUb+I/fxbwQxHd9JUxlu+HToeUU=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DrAACvwA1d/5RdJa1kHQEBBQEHBQGBVQYBCwGBQ1ADalUgBAsohBaDRwOOYZoTgS4UgRADVAkBAQEMAQEjCgIBAYRAAheCRyM2Bw4BAwEBBAEBAgEFbYo3DIVLAgEDEhERDAEBNwEPAgEIDgwCGQ0CAgIwFRACBAENBSKDAAGBagMdAQ6aYgKBOIhfcYExgnkBAQWBRkGCdBiCEQMGgQwoAYtdF4F/gRAoH4JMPoJhAgECAYEqARECAR4XgnMygiaLf4JNjU2NcAkCghKGTYkrg2obgiiHDI4SjSWBL4V+j1MCBAIEBQIOAQEFgVcCL2dYEQhwFWUBgkGCQTeDOYUUhT9yAYEojwwBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,403,1557187200"; d="scan'208";a="579516144"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 22 Jun 2019 05:49:15 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x5M5nFGr003478 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 22 Jun 2019 05:49:15 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 00:49:14 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 00:49:14 -0500
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 00:49:14 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=sDfD1HVQDpVEDEuf8JZsqj2CNxtvn+Y4YlBr40VABG4=; b=hHp6gdgbq+kMWmgBGFK5ewVEssAjgnxecwaHIPa0dkBGuOT5tzPfWokO5NTur0B6EtxuAXFtcekaHcetOvmJhlfBklLroFf8DuyBe8/cbUgnVPyDzfQwIOeTXZWS2LyhupqAT2mPHe7jlAxXWqoVnzFoQqyztohQrQ7EZyfR9hc=
Received: from DM5PR11MB1322.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.168.104.140) by DM5PR11MB1258.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.168.108.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2008.16; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 05:49:13 +0000
Received: from DM5PR11MB1322.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8d6c:2d4e:6b5d:fc95]) by DM5PR11MB1322.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8d6c:2d4e:6b5d:fc95%5]) with mapi id 15.20.1987.014; Sat, 22 Jun 2019 05:49:13 +0000
From: "Douglas Gash (dcmgash)" <dcmgash@cisco.com>
To: Deborah Brungard <db3546@att.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs@ietf.org>, "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <jclarke@cisco.com>, "opsawg-chairs@ietf.org" <opsawg-chairs@ietf.org>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Deborah Brungard's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-13: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHVKL4463UIhdiXL0mHGZFMosFwsw==
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 05:49:13 +0000
Message-ID: <6A1FD7DF-7C0E-44E3-8F19-2B73A5D5B92D@cisco.com>
References: <155785161334.30214.9742358968370478777.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <155785161334.30214.9742358968370478777.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.26.0.170902
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=dcmgash@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:c0e0:1006::4]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e06fe132-da73-4848-0603-08d6f6d55adf
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR11MB1258;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR11MB1258:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR11MB12586DF3CFF061469A4997D0B7E60@DM5PR11MB1258.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0076F48C8A
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(136003)(39860400002)(396003)(366004)(346002)(376002)(51914003)(199004)(189003)(76176011)(99286004)(81156014)(256004)(81166006)(36756003)(14444005)(229853002)(5660300002)(4326008)(25786009)(14454004)(110136005)(54906003)(8676002)(33656002)(316002)(102836004)(446003)(6512007)(2616005)(476003)(6246003)(7736002)(11346002)(68736007)(966005)(58126008)(86362001)(71200400001)(71190400001)(53936002)(2906002)(6486002)(6306002)(6436002)(46003)(6506007)(53546011)(73956011)(8936002)(64756008)(305945005)(66476007)(66446008)(66946007)(66556008)(6116002)(486006)(478600001)(91956017)(76116006)(186003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR11MB1258; H:DM5PR11MB1322.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 17l/fxFThxgXrppNBmJaswRulpz8wVEz2TW02mndgbAZkH9cuwJ58AZPhdSJQQOoDUL/5UGnuEZ0MNfRZDY/1une4XgSBzyJLsC4zlbI0MmWBMxxPPUT504x/+HjDlXRBYEKI2i2XHg8+OPYGOP2dJCP/DpfjKRsopviQwfCBHKhdzA/wnSdrNYC4QBMET0sgUaDSWsOx122XZhuUU77+CMSudA2cB+EL1Gq4kSaPVrwUMRpQQ2HM3Uhsswbv2NGe+FWrT89sxL6btPXTH1HKYUO9bxdO3NLE6upYIx6xY1lua61gwxs6ZlhAlxiATZvokZ6E4s1dEE0sWKuu/dcOEL15d2tyrCmo5NqUrtrnTrCbwzV4EIoXk+heRHmsl/hsJm/QoeDO8l9kW6nQED0HXsercGBysiwDjcRtQV1v48=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <566F66E86700304A9B9BCED7FD81F725@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e06fe132-da73-4848-0603-08d6f6d55adf
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Jun 2019 05:49:13.1035 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: dcmgash@cisco.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR11MB1258
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.12, xch-rcd-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-12.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/gjAcUqB4Iq40ynIhvRSSg0JcGLs>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Deborah Brungard's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-13: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 05:49:20 -0000
Many thanks for the comments. Please see responses from authors inline, marked “TA”. Action items from this mail to update the document are marked: [AI-TA] to mean: “action item for the authors”. On 14/05/2019, 17:33, "Deborah Brungard via Datatracker" <noreply@ietf.org> wrote: Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- While the status is an Informational document, not PS, I still would prefer if earlier in the document it provided the reader with deployment concerns e.g. the introduction. TA> Agreed, we will add a summary of section 10 to the introduction [AI-TA] The current introduction states a "wide range" of clients and servers are already deployed. Not until section 10 is the reader informed "Multiple implementations of the protocol described in the original TACACS+ Draft `The Draft' [TheDraft] have been deployed. As the protocol was never standardized, current implementations may be incompatible in non-obvious ways". And section 10.5 on Best Practices which has the new restriction that it not be deployed with other traffic. This information is needed much earlier in the document to give context for the reader. TA> Agreed, we will augment the introduction as advised [AI-TA]
- [OPSAWG] Deborah Brungard's No Objection on draft… Deborah Brungard via Datatracker
- Re: [OPSAWG] Deborah Brungard's No Objection on d… Douglas Gash (dcmgash)