IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Thu, 27 April 2017 14:16 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E5FF1279EB; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 07:16:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 ZqxIlZo6oug8; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 07:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (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 9F694126CC7; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 07:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id r190so19975156wme.1; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 07:15:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6xetieyuji6A+07NK9QEm8hAk1miTNf6z0WEcL3162Q=; b=ZmHIf4m0niEslbgGZ3fmDTYg5AAPPm/T/sRsP+AY7EqdDD//tuokVqp+svdFBPJ77U fJtKbSoAZrtwlSoDV8KQ7AzS+HWedBohqUT9V76BnwTBAdDdfKzgBqaXtDn7N6//a/Wj 4TL/QylKEREOVsCi3VHva6JMtDQy/0HxJFTayzqzQNRcFIdZT/zRtcVDf3e1EyT9OQiz ktQQXRgkrfSgrqBgi2jgkLTHmpma93ZxiGvatdFojhOhXOTZ9tVhPX0uGvobm6SnG+Nz tiKaOWS5OldXWvVsuCeR59Pc06IcMoRLQUSFLI+SoTfDhQdyAuZI9VFHnIUD/6VkP0Ca MUKQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6xetieyuji6A+07NK9QEm8hAk1miTNf6z0WEcL3162Q=; b=ABVl7QFQszHklsAjlEUZNz8U1tTwibIHBqhZNxq8SU1LFJD1anMR3BwNqmx//vz4qH r8pMmPRMyDunahkIKsN7XCXgb486qdsKBEYVhTJAaRWNn+17bp8TO0TmoQljioq6xPve noHGAngYPiz85DKeUVnqP55QcL5jKN02mHJ8jjJmqrtQTm8dgZF9cN4L2lF1aXotHkl0 RqoxOyu0vg8XbFrbKKDGfTOTFgiT99vWpb2TTcm3Zqgbb/wX2IdJpRr1xdxd/xo1Rlah EuwfvJlgV4tGNHZTVs+R+imTiHQqLfUFne8XvyhZ5dFBoc9I9LmdWfUEFDQ+2gR6m1St q9oA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/5TqavNcumYK2hUb7TmObQiEbzBwIaK/4JEu09Tkiw/4ANsndsV OzJLJTRqhIyUSXYomh45cZFNF30BndWf
X-Received: by 10.28.19.6 with SMTP id 6mr2454873wmt.96.1493302557850; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 07:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.135.120 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Apr 2017 07:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <d4fa3596-8ff5-5d31-41c3-10e189d553b0@nostrum.com>
References: <149322447211.30122.5870367500760951821.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <f366eb05-b82c-123e-d0ca-8701fe16a469@nostrum.com> <CAHbuEH5vDjZ5tSt=314Dquju7N26XSOqQPNjV=jO6D8Xn7QVdQ@mail.gmail.com> <89d1c702-7830-1f5a-1176-0b894e2d99e9@nostrum.com> <CAHbuEH5OX-GiwF7zqWmks5k6yLj5SXvXwYVFjCChrsa_ckokwQ@mail.gmail.com> <f6ac64b0-1e50-b02f-7043-8cae2cd56020@nostrum.com> <CAHbuEH7B=bzknZnfF_qsE435peOOd8XYjd=YKREeXw0RW18aGA@mail.gmail.com> <0c744357-0d94-62a8-c16b-81a02ef5db45@nostrum.com> <CAG4d1reMAu0YmTfPnStYFx1DotDpwnuGP3BM8ks5-YA1XxrKtA@mail.gmail.com> <d4fa3596-8ff5-5d31-41c3-10e189d553b0@nostrum.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 10:15:57 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1recAczYUczXSw9w8=RT6ijE2fkc1FoRVF5_s-g1EaDe=w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Cc: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, "rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org" <rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain@ietf.org, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11468f0280c735054e269884"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/3l1LBjermroCnoNa6LLnLGU9DeY>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 14:16:01 -0000

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:

> On 4/26/17 23:02, Alia Atlas wrote:
>
>> First, the YANG model is primarily for information in motion - either for
>> configuration to the device
>> or to read from the device.   It is much less likely to represent the
>> data structure and storage in the device.
>> I believe that this draft's context is strictly for information in motion.
>>
>
>
> Thanks; I understand all that. I'm trying to focus on the final paragraph
> of section 5, though, which appears to be an exception to what you say
> above.


I don't understand why - IMHO, that paragraph is simply saying  - this
model passes keys around (in motion).  Of course, a system shouldn't store
such keys unencrypted.  From what Acee says, this "motherhood and apple
pie" additional advice was added due to secdir review.

Regards,
Alia



> /a
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email