Re: Last Call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Hi Acee,

Yes, I've been confused (more than once) by ietf-key-chain and 
ietf-key-store. Sorry.

The correct graph is here.
http://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/impact_analysis.php?modules[]=ietf-key-chain&orgs[]=ietf&recurse=0&rfcs=1
And thanks to Joe Clarke for improving the tool in real-time.

The graph shows a dependency on the ietf-netconf-acm YANG module.
Checking the draft...

    <CODE BEGINS> file "[e-mail]"
    module ietf-key-chain {
        namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-key-chain";
        // replace with IANA namespace when assigned
        prefix "key-chain";
       import ietf-yang-types {
            prefix "yang";
        }

        import ietf-netconf-acm {
            prefix "nacm";

The normative reference shows:

        [NETCONF-ACM]
                   Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
                   Protocol (NETCONF) Access Control Model",RFC 6536 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6536>, March
                   2012

We have in fact two ietf-netconf-acm YANG modules
     One from RFC 6536
     One from [e-mail], 
draft-ietf-netconf-rfc6536bis-00.txt 
<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-rfc6536bis>

Which one do you depend on? Do you want to use import by revision, or 
you want to use the future draft-ietf-netconf-rfc6536bis-00.txt 
<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netconf-rfc6536bis>?

Regards, Benoit
> Hi Benoit,
>
> This is the IETF key-chain model which is comprised of a lists of 
> symmetric keys that are used for applications such as routing protocol 
> authentication and encryption. The IETF keystore model is comprised of 
> lists of asymmetric keys and certificates that are used for 
> applications such as NETCONF authentication and encryption. The two 
> models are in no way dependent on one another.
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
> From: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Date: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 5:57 AM
> To: Acee Lindem <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Jeff 
> Tantsura <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, 
> Routing WG <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Cc: rtgwg-chairs <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>>, 
> "[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>" 
> <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>>, 
> "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" 
> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Kent 
> Watsen <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Subject: Re: Last Call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain
>
>     On 2/7/2017 12:53 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
>>     I support as a co-author. This IETF YANG model is currently
>>     referenced by a number or the other protocol models for
>>     specification of authentication keys including OSPF, IS-IS, RIP,
>>     and VRRP.
>     And note that there are dependencies on some NETCONF WG documents.
>     http://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/impact_analysis.php?modules[]=ietf-keychain&orgs[]=ietf&recurse=1&rfcs=1
>
>     Basically, this "Client/Server Configuration Model" package, i.e.
>     those drafts:
>         draft-ietf-netconf-keystore-00 Keystore Model
>         draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server-00 SSH Client and Server
>     Models
>         draft-ietf-netconf-tls-client-server-00 TLS Client and Server
>     Models
>         draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-client-server-00 NETCONF Client and
>     Server Models
>         draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-client-server-00 RESTCONF Client
>     and Server Models
>
>     For this package, see
>     http://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/impact_analysis.php?modules[]=ietf-tls-client&modules[]=ietf-tls-server&modules[]=ietf-ssh-client&modules[]=ietf-ssh-server&modules[]=ietf-restconf-client&modules[]=ietf-restconf-server&modules[]=ietf-key-store&modules[]=ietf-netconf-client&modules[]=ietf-netconf-server&orgs[]=ietf&recurse=&rfcs=1
>
>
>
>     Copying the NETCONF chairs, to get the latest status, and to make
>     sure this NETCONF package progresses at the same pace.
>
>     Regards, Benoit
>>
>>     Thanks,
>>     Acee
>>     P.S. Not aware of any IPR in case you want to ask again ;^)
>>
>>     From: Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>     Date: Monday, February 6, 2017 at 1:35 PM
>>     To: Routing WG <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>     Cc: rtgwg-chairs <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>,
>>     "[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>"
>>     <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>     Subject: Re: Last Call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain
>>     Resent-From: <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>     Resent-To: Acee Lindem <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>,
>>     Jeffrey Zhang <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>,
>>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Helen Chen
>>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Yingzhen Qu
>>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>,
>>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>     Resent-Date: Monday, February 6, 2017 at 1:35 PM
>>
>>         Dear RTGWG,
>>
>>         There have been significant changes to the
>>         draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain draft.
>>
>>         We would like the wg to review the updated draft and hence
>>         start another, 1 week long WGLC.
>>
>>         Please indicate support/ no-support by February 13, 2017.
>>
>>         Thanks,
>>
>>         Jeff & Chris
>>
>>         *From: *Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]
>>         <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>         *Date: *Friday, September 9, 2016 at 16:11
>>         *To: *RTGWG <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>         *Cc: *rtgwg-chairs <[e-mail]
>>         <mailto:[e-mail]>>,
>>         <[e-mail]
>>         <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>         *Subject: *Last Call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain
>>
>>         Dear RTGWG,
>>
>>         The authors have requested the RTGWG to last call
>>         draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain
>>
>>         There was consensus that document is ready for the last call
>>         during the last IETF meeting and the authors have addressed
>>         all the comments from Directorate QA review.
>>
>>         Please indicate support or no-support by September 23rd, 2016.
>>
>>         IPR:
>>
>>         If you are listed as a document author or contributor, please
>>         respond to this email.
>>
>>         of whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The
>>         response needs to be sent to the RTGWG mailing list.
>>
>>         The document will not advance to the next stage until a
>>         response has been received from each author and each
>>
>>         individual that has contributed to the document.
>>
>>         Thanks,
>>
>>         Jeff & Chris
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     rtgwg mailing list
>>     [e-mail]://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>