Re: [Last-Call] [I2nsf] Last Call: <draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-08.txt> (I2NSF Capability YANG Data Model) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/09/2020 11:54, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong wrote:
Hi Tom,
I have reflected your comments on the revision below:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-10

Please see my answers inline.

<tp>
Yes, that looks better,

Tom Petch


On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:05 PM tom petch <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Paul

Picking out two points and top posting them

RFC790 was obsoleted in 1982 and the information that was in it is now
kept up-to-date as part of the IANA website so what I am saying is that
I expect that  you will be asked to change the reference to refer to
that part of the  IANA website.  Yes, it is technically possible to
include a reference to RFC790 in an I-D but that does not mean it will
be allowed-)

  => I replaced RRFC790 with the following IANA Website for Protocol Numbers:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/protocol-numbers.xhtml


On RFC8174, that is the current standard for defining the rules about
using MUST, MAY, SHALL and such like in capitals in an I-D so if you
want to use those words in capitals with the sense defined in RFC8174
then you MUST(!) reference RFC8174. Looking more closely, I see no such
usage of these words in capitals in this I-D so you could remove the
section entirely but if you are REQUIRED to include such usage at a
later date, perhaps as a result of a review such as a security review,
then you will need to include the paragraph from RFC8174 and include
references to RFC2119 and RFC8174. So what you had  in -08 was invalid
and what you have in -09 is invalid but as it stands you could remove
section 2 entirely.

  => I removed Section 2 entirely.

       Thanks.

       Best Regards,
       Paul



HTH

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 7:19 PM


Hi Tom,
I have reflected your comments with the revised draft:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-09

I put my answers inline below.

On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:29 PM tom petch <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Looking at the YANG:

RFC4443 is referenced and so must be in the I-D References

  => This RFC4443 is included in the Normative References.


RFC790 is referenced but this is now online under IANA - you can
see the

=> This RFC790 is included in the Normative References with its URL.


IANA reference in
               draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-08
but that I-D needs to add it to the I-D references as this one will
need
to; I note that this announcement flags it as a downref but think
that
that is misguided -  it needs replacing.

  => Could you clarify this question?
       I put the reference to
draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-08
in the draft.


IPsec is the correct spelling - there are some IPSec in YANG
description clauses

  => IPsec is used instead of IPSec.


Figure 8
     2.  The location of the NSF is 221.159.112.140.
This address does not appear in the XML, nor is it an address
reserved
for use in documentation AFAICT; in fact, I cannot see any
ipaddress
anywhere in this I-D

  => I put the following text for an actual IPv4 address for
documentation
       in Appendix 5:

      The IPv4 address of the NSF is assumed to be 192.0.2.11
[RFC5737].
      Also, the IPv6 address of the NSF is assumed to be
2001:DB8:0:1::11
[RFC3849].

      ---
      In addition, I added the XML examples of IPv6 as well as those of
IPv4
in Appendix A
      with Figure 5 and Figure 7.



s.2 correctly cites RFC8174 but does not use the text prescribed
there.

   => I removed RFC8174 from the draft.


   ' identity system-event-capability'
references system-alarm - system event would seem more apt. More
generally, these references for identity could be more specific,
e.g
    identity access-violation
could reference 'access-violation ' rather than the more generic
'system
event'

   => I tried to improve the descriptions of the events and alarms
above.

        Thanks for your valuable comments.

        Best Regards,
        Paul


Tom Petch


----- Original Message -----
From: "The IESG" <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx>
To: "IETF-Announce" <ietf-announce@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: <rdd@xxxxxxxx>; <i2nsf@xxxxxxxx>;
<draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model@xxxxxxxx>;
<i2nsf-chairs@xxxxxxxx>; "Linda Dunbar" <dunbar.ll@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 6:59 PM

The IESG has received a request from the Interface to Network
Security
Functions WG (i2nsf) to consider the following document: - 'I2NSF
Capability
YANG Data Model'
   <draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model-08.txt> as Proposed
Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and
solicits
final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2020-09-08. Exceptionally,
comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain
the
beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


    This document defines a YANG data model for the capabilities
of
    various Network Security Functions (NSFs) in the Interface to
Network
    Security Functions (I2NSF) framework to centrally manage the
    capabilities of the various NSFs.

The file can be obtained via


https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model/


The following IPR Declarations may be related to this I-D:

    https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3556/
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3606/

The document contains these normative downward references.
See RFC 3967 for additional information:
     rfc8329: Framework for Interface to Network Security
Functions
(Informational - IETF stream)
     rfc8192: Interface to Network Security Functions (I2NSF):
Problem
Statement and Use Cases (Informational - IETF stream)
     rfc790: Assigned numbers (Historic - Legacy stream)
     rfc3444: On the Difference between Information Models and
Data
Models (Informational - IETF stream)
     draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model: I2NSF NSF
Monitoring
YANG Data Model (None - IETF stream)


-- =========================== Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Associate Professor Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Sungkyunkwan University Office: +82-31-299-4957 Email:
jaehoon.paul@xxxxxxxxx, pauljeong@xxxxxxxx Personal Homepage:
http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
<http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php>






--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux