IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-15

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Fri, 17 March 2017 16:30 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.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 8F8E31294D2; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:30:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.521
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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
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 9R3lMZIU6RJc; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24C371294CA; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 09:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5850; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1489768227; x=1490977827; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=99UU5b74/K/PHpLk3ygVnvYRWrW8qDEG5Hdy9J5Qb6Q=; b=X4LMiPW5LgY8uF9ET1xJ4rdpnS4KXYVGEf9jbrCR7g/ny+7sOrjvB6Z6 uH68qgwKcVeqloUWViwlghT3yCzeMOmt4ItnoJcwnbeP954fMROxSStwd pxLBGsdOpSiUvG2ZQYK2bBbcueZUql6bl4utFg+fc/v+7X7rixTALPRbP c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AvAQBvDsxY/5FdJa1eGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBgm5jgWsHjWqRWogSiAGFL4IOhiICgn8/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRUBAQEBA4EJAgEIDgMDAQIoByERFAkIAgQBEoloAxW0X4c0DYMJAQEBAQEBAQMBAQEBAQEBIYs9glGBYEOFRQWcDzoBjhCEMYF7hSiKCIpgiHIBHziBBFgVhxh1hxoBBh+BCoENAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,177,1486425600"; d="scan'208,217";a="399556400"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Mar 2017 16:30:24 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (xch-rtp-011.cisco.com [64.101.220.151]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v2HGUO40018851 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:30:24 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (64.101.220.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:30:23 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:30:24 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-15
Thread-Topic: AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-15
Thread-Index: AQHSnqArfIBmJVuP5U2jKUk/njS/baGZOkkA
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:30:23 +0000
Message-ID: <D4F18727.A337A%acee@cisco.com>
References: <CAG4d1rdgpeoOPFBz+4vq_BKGvYyLGWtD1vPycpqxF+zwvTEyqw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rdgpeoOPFBz+4vq_BKGvYyLGWtD1vPycpqxF+zwvTEyqw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.198]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D4F18727A337Aaceeciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/LEf9ZWRR_8mf6w5LhgtURjTzKXA>
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: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:30:29 -0000

Hi Alia,

These issues will be resolved in the next revision which I will post shortly after IETF 98.

Thanks,
Acee

From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com<mailto:akatlas@gmail.com>>
Date: Thursday, March 16, 2017 at 5:56 PM
To: Routing WG <rtgwg@ietf.org<mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>>, "draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain@ietf.org>>
Subject: AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-15
Resent-From: <alias-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:alias-bounces@ietf.org>>
Resent-To: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>>, Jeffrey Zhang <zzhang@juniper.net<mailto:zzhang@juniper.net>>, Derek Yeung <derek@arrcus.com<mailto:derek@arrcus.com>>, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com<mailto:yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>>, <yi.yang@sockrate.com<mailto:yi.yang@sockrate.com>>, Ing-Wher Chen <Ing-Wher_Chen@jabil.com<mailto:Ing-Wher_Chen@jabil.com>>
Resent-Date: Thursday, March 16, 2017 at 5:56 PM

As is customary, I have done my AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-15.
First, I would like to thank the many authors - Acee, Yingzhen, Derek, Ing-Wher,
Jeffrey, and Yi - for their work on this well-written document.

Although I have requested a 3 week IETF Last Call, I have two matters that do need
to be resolved before this is placed on an IESG telechat.

First, there are 6 authors.  Please either reduce it to the standard 5 author limit or send me, the WG chairs, and shepherd a clear explanation of the contributions and why that author limit should not be respected in this case.

Second, the security considerations section should be updated to reflect the new general YANG security considerations that also mentions restconf.

Thank you for your hard work on this,
Alia

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email