[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-17

Watson Ladd via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 26 February 2024 17:10 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Watson Ladd via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <170896742027.58906.12731500706967830981@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 09:10:20 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/VAEAXiOxBXrnzCkz-7jTvKmoDyU>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-17

Reviewer: Watson Ladd
Review result: Has Nits

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments
were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors. Document
editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call
comments.

This document copy-pastes the security considerations from RFC 8795 and says
that the augmentations have the security properties inherited from where they
are attached. However it isn't clear if this is the only way in which fields
defined here are sensitive. I think some rewording may be in order to clarify.
Otherwise I think this document is a straightforward augmentation of a YANG
model.

Sincerely,
Watson Ladd

[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-cc… Watson Ladd via Datatracker
[secdir] 回复: Secdir last call review of draft-iet… Zhenghaomian
Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-iet… Watson Ladd