Dear Carlos,
thank you for performing this review. All of your issues will be addressed
in version 9 of this I-D, to be released on Monday 11/13. In particular,
the bullet points in section 5 have been justified.
They were:
o Narrowly define NSF categories, or their roles, when implemented
within a network
within a network
o Attempt to impose functional requirements or constraints, either
directly or indirectly, upon NSF developers
directly or indirectly, upon NSF developers
o Be a limited lowest common denominator approach, where interfaces
can only support a limited set of standardized functions, without
allowing for developer-specific functions
can only support a limited set of standardized functions, without
allowing for developer-specific functions
o Be seen as endorsing a best common practice for the implementation
of NSFs; rather, this document describes the conceptual structure
and reference model of I2NSF
of NSFs; rather, this document describes the conceptual structure
and reference model of I2NSF
They are now:
o Narrowly define NSF categories, or their roles, when implemented
within a network. Security is a constantly evolving discipline.
The I2NSF framework relies on an object-oriented information
model, which provides an extensible definition of NSF information
elements and categories; it is recommended that implementations
follow this model.
within a network. Security is a constantly evolving discipline.
The I2NSF framework relies on an object-oriented information
model, which provides an extensible definition of NSF information
elements and categories; it is recommended that implementations
follow this model.
o Attempt to impose functional requirements or constraints, either
directly or indirectly, upon NSF developers. Implementations
should be free to realize and apply NSFs in a way that best
suits the needs of the applications and environment using them.
directly or indirectly, upon NSF developers. Implementations
should be free to realize and apply NSFs in a way that best
suits the needs of the applications and environment using them.
o Be a limited lowest common denominator approach, where interfaces
can only support a limited set of standardized functions, without
allowing for developer-specific functions. NSFs, interfaces, and
the data communicated should be extensible, so that they can
evolve to protect against new threats.
can only support a limited set of standardized functions, without
allowing for developer-specific functions. NSFs, interfaces, and
the data communicated should be extensible, so that they can
evolve to protect against new threats.
o Be seen as endorsing a best common practice for the implementation
of NSFs; rather, this document describes the conceptual structure
and reference model of I2NSF. The purpose of this reference model
is to define a common set of concepts in order to facilitate the
flexible implementation of an I2NSF system.
of NSFs; rather, this document describes the conceptual structure
and reference model of I2NSF. The purpose of this reference model
is to define a common set of concepts in order to facilitate the
flexible implementation of an I2NSF system.
best regards,
John
On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 6:55 PM, Carlos Martinez <carlosm3011@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Reviewer: Carlos Martinez
Review result: Ready
I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of
the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included
in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other last call comments.
Overall I've found this document to be READY. I do believe that some parts'
readability could be improved however, particularly Section 5. This section
describes some principles a potential implementation of the spec should follow
but provides little or no justification for them. I believe additional text
could help.
Thank you to the authors for their great work!
Carlos
_______________________________________________
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
--
regards,
John