Good.  But since we are getting a YANG doctor review, let’s wait for that 
before revving the draft.

Yoav


> On 9 Apr 2019, at 10:49, Rafa Marin-Lopez <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Yoav:
> 
> After thinking about these past days, I personally think the same. 
> 
> I would add a uint16 and a comment in the description. As we agreed in the 
> last IETF meeting, I do not think our I-D should solve this problem, since 
> this problem happens in general.
> 
> As an example:
> 
> typedef ike-integrity-algorithm-t {
>                       type uint32; 
>                       description “The acceptable numbers are defined in IANA 
> Registry - Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2) Parameters - IKEv2  
> Transform Type 1 - Encryption Algorithm Transform IDs";
> }
> 
> Is this reasonable?
> 
> 
>> El 5 abr 2019, a las 20:13, Yoav Nir <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> escribió:
>> 
>> At this point I’m wondering if it would not be a better strategy to avoid 
>> all enumerations of algorithms, whether they are spelled out or imported 
>> from draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types, and instead use the numbers from the 
>> IANA registry for IPsec.
>> 
>> That does not help us deprecate old algorithms, but it solves the other 
>> issue, which is what to do when a new algorithm is added to IPsec. We don’t 
>> want to have to publish a new i2nsf document whenever that happens, and if 
>> the algorithm identifier is just a number, new values can be added by IANA.
>> 
>> Yoav
>> 
>>> On 5 Apr 2019, at 20:42, Andy Bierman <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I think conformance for identities is handled very poorly in YANG.
>>> There is an if-feature-stmt allowed inside an identity in YANG 1.1.
>>> This implies that any identity without if-feature is mandatory-to-implement.
>>> 
>>> If the identities are in a separate module, the server can list it as an 
>>> imported module,
>>> which tells the client the server does not implement any of the identities.
>>> 
>>> There is no standard way for the server to inform the client which 
>>> identities it supports
>>> for a given identityref data node.
>>> 
>>> The common implementation strategy is to completely ignore YANG conformance 
>>> for identities
>>> (as Mahesh explained). You just try setting the leaf and see if the server 
>>> accepts it.
>>> 
>>> Andy
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 10:33 AM Mahesh Jethanandani 
>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> Hi Linda,
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 5, 2019, at 9:51 AM, Linda Dunbar <[email protected] 
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Dear YANG Doctor:
>>>>  
>>>> We need your help in reviewing the YANG model in 
>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection which I2NSF WG is about to call 
>>>> WGLC.
>>>>  
>>>> In particular, we need your advice on the following issue:
>>>>  
>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-04 imports from 
>>>> draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types, which appears to be a generic list of 
>>>> algorithms.
>>>> The problem is that the list in draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types could 
>>>> contain algorithms that are not suitable for IPsec (such as secp192r1 for 
>>>> key agreement), and right now it seems to lack some older algorithms that 
>>>> have fallen out of fashion (3DES) but is still needed in IPsec.  
>>> 
>>> All the algorithms in draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types are defined as 
>>> identities. If you do not find the algorithm you are looking for in the 
>>> list of defined algorithms, you can go ahead and define your own in your 
>>> own draft, using the same base identity from the ietf-crypto-types module.
>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Questions to the YANG Doctor:
>>>> 1.       Is it better to list the IPsec specific algorithms in 
>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection (which is a subset of 
>>>> draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types? Or to import all crypto algorithms many 
>>>> of which are not relevant to IPsec? What is the common practice? 
>>> 
>>> Importing ietf-crypto-types does not mean you have to implement every 
>>> algorithm listed in the module. You can import the module and chose to 
>>> implement the algorithms you want to implement, including defining any new 
>>> ones.
>>> 
>>>> 2.      If we do import from draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types, does it mean 
>>>> draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection cannot be published until 
>>>> draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types is published?
>>> 
>>> Yes. The i2nsf draft will hit the state of MISSREF in the RFC Editor queue. 
>>> But that should not prevent anyone from starting implementation of the 
>>> module. As a side note, the NETCONF WG is planning on sending the 
>>> crypto-types draft to IESG shortly. What you do not want is to duplicate 
>>> the definition of the algorithms in your own draft.
>>> 
>>> HTH.
>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Thank you very much, 
>>>>  
>>>> Linda & Yoav
>>>>  
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> yang-doctors mailing list
>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors 
>>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors>
>>> Mahesh Jethanandani
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yang-doctors mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors 
>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> I2nsf mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf 
>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf>
>> _______________________________________________
>> I2nsf mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Rafa Marin-Lopez, PhD
> Dept. Information and Communications Engineering (DIIC)
> Faculty of Computer Science-University of Murcia
> 30100 Murcia - Spain
> Telf: +34868888501 Fax: +34868884151 e-mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
I2nsf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Reply via email to