IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sidr] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-publication-10: (with COMMENT)

"Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> Tue, 31 January 2017 16:15 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DAB21299AC; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:15:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] autolearn=unavailable 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 wNQNWyF3BJAr; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:15:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B93B129504; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 08:15:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.1.39] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v0VGF2Vj098277 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:15:03 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.39]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
To: Rob Austein <sra@hactrn.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:15:03 -0600
Message-ID: <1B892C42-207B-446D-A1DD-7B4F39337806@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170131003921.5D3914665264@minas-ithil.hactrn.net>
References: <148477318982.2006.5926498434357117741.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170131003921.5D3914665264@minas-ithil.hactrn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5319)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/zrDwJlceqGHB2oF4XaapFOwfzSU>
Cc: Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>, sidr-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, sidr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-sidr-publication@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sidr] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-publication-10: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:15:12 -0000

On 30 Jan 2017, at 18:39, Rob Austein wrote:

> At Wed, 18 Jan 2017 12:59:49 -0800, Ben Campbell wrote:
> ...
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Most of my comments have already been made by others. But with the
>> questions about upgrade paths, I see there is in fact a "version" 
>> element
>> defined. How is that expected to be used? I don't see a version 
>> related
>> error code.
>
> In the most straightforward implementation, wrong version would show
> up as a schema validation error.

Does that mean that the version element is not actually used?

>
> We could certainly add an error code for this if you prefer, just
> didn't think of it.

I think that's up to you (and the WG). The main thing I would like to 
see is some text talking about how versioning is expected to work, or at 
least how _this_ version should behave in version mismatch conditions. 
Whether or not it needs an error code probably depends on that text.

Thanks!

Ben.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email