Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Thu, 13 August 2009 20:37 UTC

Return-Path: <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564B628C204; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kYCwE1ALKxXD; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (hardaker-pt.tunnel.tserv1.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:ffff::af]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7303628C191; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (wjh.hardakers.net [10.0.0.2]) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E468981D7; Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>
Organization: Sparta
References: <AC6674AB7BC78549BB231821ABF7A9AE8E775BCA45@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <016701ca1bf7$400ac480$0601a8c0@allison> <AC6674AB7BC78549BB231821ABF7A9AE8E777C002A@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <4A83FA7D.9040209@bwijnen.net> <AC6674AB7BC78549BB231821ABF7A9AE8E777C00E6@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <4A8430BE.2050701@andybierman.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:37:50 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4A8430BE.2050701@andybierman.com> (Andy Bierman's message of "Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:26:54 -0700")
Message-ID: <sdk517cuw1.fsf@wes.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) XEmacs/21.4.21 (linux, no MULE)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock@tools.ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 20:37:51 -0000

>>>>> On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:26:54 -0700, Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com> said:

AB> discard-changes only works because authorization is ignored,
AB> otherwise the agent would be deadlocked.

Huh????  why would discard-changes be authorization ignorant???  That's
just as unsafe (unless you're only discarding your own changes).

AB> Only the global lock operation defined in RFC 4741
AB> can prevent this problem.

The global lock has different issues.

The problem isn't with the locking.  Locking, and partial locking are
good.  It's with the global-level commit operation.
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Cobham Analytic Solutions