Re: [secdir] review of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-04

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Wed, 04 July 2018 18:34 UTC

Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3757130E30; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 11:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 e62NeTCETLSy; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 11:34:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from anna.localdomain (firewallix.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.247]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5087B130E01; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 11:34:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by anna.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0D04E22DCC4F; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 20:34:36 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 20:34:36 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Daniel Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
Cc: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf.all@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180704183436.zjzwz4vowqi5phz7@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Mail-Followup-To: Daniel Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf.all@ietf.org
References: <f919a44f-d93b-f399-cc5d-1353c1c5b57d@lounge.org> <20180704124128.qpr7tunjw5quiex6@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <9b2f8091-9ead-e188-ee34-1acfead2dcd2@lounge.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <9b2f8091-9ead-e188-ee34-1acfead2dcd2@lounge.org>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180622
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/A0X_V8v5eO3cYsvuo1d3olgBdXc>
Subject: Re: [secdir] review of draft-ietf-netconf-nmda-restconf-04
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdir/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 18:34:42 -0000

On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 11:08:10AM -0700, Daniel Harkins wrote:
> 
> 
>   I'm suggesting SHOULD _or_ MAY and I thought where would be obvious.
> It is the places that say "optional to support" in 3.2.1. and 3.2.2 as
> I indicated. For example, 3.2.1 says,
> 
>    The "with-defaults" query parameter ([RFC8040], Section 4.8.9 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8040#section-4.8.9>) is
>    optional to support when interacting with {+restconf}/ds/ietf-
>    datastores:operational.
> 
> 3.2.2 has similar text. As to why, it is for consistency and clarity in
> expressing what you want.
>

What is unclear about 'optional to support'? RFC 8040 uses similar
language and I do not recall that anyone had a problem with this so
far.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>