Rafa and Gabriel: How about reference the module ietf-access-control-list specified in RFC8519 to avoid enumerating all the L4 protocols listed in IANA?
The Module ietf-access-control-list specified in RFC8519 only list TCP and UDP and have ICMP defined using Type/Code (both uint8). Maybe import the "grouping acl-icmp-header-fields", and augment the L4 protocol values that are not specified by the RFC8519? Many protocols values listed in *https://www.iana.org/* assignments/protocol-numbers/protocol-numbers.xhtml <https://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/protocol-numbers..xhtml> are obsolete. There is no reason to enumerate them in your draft. My two cents. Linda On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 3:02 AM Rafa Marin-Lopez <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Linda: > > In order to see whether we are in the same page here I would like to ask a > question. > > What Yoav and Paul (and us) suggested was something as simple as this one: > > 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"; > } > > Following this approach we can solve easily Paul Wouters’ comment by > replacing this with (for example): > > *Option 1)* > > typedef ipsec-upper-layer-proto { > type uint8; > description “ The IPsec protection can be applied to specific IP > traffic and layer 4 traffic (TCP, UDP, SCTP...) or > ANY protocol in the IP packet payload.”; > reference “IANA Registry Protocol Numbers”; > } > > > However if we have to include a type enumeration with one enum and the > value in the IANA registry per enum we would have something like (in my > opinion more complex) > > *Option 2)* > > typedef ipsec-upper-layer-proto { > type union { > type uint8; > type enumeration { > enum ICMP { > value 1; > } > enum IGMP { > value 2; > } > … > *//And this enum per each value in > https://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/protocol-numbers.xhtml > <https://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers/protocol-numbers..xhtml>* > } > } > } > > > So what option (1 or 2) are you referring to? > > Best Regards. > > El 17 may 2019, a las 17:39, Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > escribió: > > Rafa, > > With regard to Paul Wouters’ related comment that would imply include > every number from the IANA protocol registry: "I think you mean what I > would call the "inner protocol" so that it is every number from the IANA > protocol registry.” > > I suggest we follow the IETF practices for YANG models: > There are many YANG models RFCs literally listed the names of the data > types defined by other RFCs. For example: draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09 > which I just reviewed as a Gen-Art Directorate. > None of those values are registered to IANA > > Those IETF practices tell us that it is not necessary to register those > values registered to IANA. > So I suggest you take the “reasonable approach proposed by Yoav (Paul > Wouters agreed) and we are agreed”. > > There are also many YANG Model RFCs literally list down the protocol > values registered in IANA (for example, use “Identity ...” to specify the > value). > > By the way, if you do want to register to IANA, you can send the following > request which can be easily done. > > https://www.iana.org/form/protocol-assignment > > > Cheers, > > Linda > > > *From:* Rafa Marin Lopez [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Friday, May 17, 2019 4:19 AM > *To:* Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Rafa Marin Lopez <[email protected]>; Yoav Nir <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; Gabriel Lopez <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [I2nsf] WGLC and IPR poll for > draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-04 > > Dear Linda, Yoav: > > Sorry for the delay in our answer (very busy weeks) > > The update is taking longer as expected for several reasons: 1) we have to > add and extend many descriptions we have. 2) Moreover Paul Wouters' second > review (we are preparing an e-mail for him as well) is long, deserves > attention and implies to applies changes. > > Finally, 3) it is important to note that, under our point of view, there > is no final resolution about what to do with the IANA Registry values > related with crypto algorithms. In fact, there is a Paul Wouters’ related > comment that would imply include every number from the IANA protocol > registry: "I think you mean what I would call the "inner protocol" so that > it is every number from the IANA protocol registry.” > > Depending on the resolution of the IANA Registry part , it may imply to > add each value in the IANA protocol registry. For us, this is pointless. We > think the reasonable approach was proposed by Yoav (Paul Wouters agreed) > and we are agreed. The only review we have received from the YANG doctor > does not mention anything about this. > > Our hope is to have the updated version, assuming 3) takes a “reasonable” > solution, at the end of this month (May) > > Best Regards. > > > > El 15 may 2019, a las 18:30, Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > escribió: > > Rafa, > > Will you upload the revised draft soon? We would like to close the WGLC > for this draft. > > Thanks, Linda > > *From:* Linda Dunbar > *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2019 9:14 AM > *To:* 'Rafa Marin-Lopez' <[email protected]>; Yoav Nir <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > *Cc:* Gabriel Lopez <[email protected]>; [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [I2nsf] WGLC and IPR poll for > draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-04 > > Rafa, et al, > > Yes, please have the revision to address the comments from YANG doctors. > > Linda > > *From:* Rafa Marin-Lopez [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Thursday, April 18, 2019 1:56 AM > *To:* Linda Dunbar <[email protected]>; Yoav Nir < > [email protected]>; [email protected] > *Cc:* Rafa Marin-Lopez <[email protected]>; Gabriel Lopez <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > *Subject:* Fwd: [I2nsf] WGLC and IPR poll for > draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-04 > > Dear Linda: > > Just a short comment. In a previous e-mail, we thought we agreed that we > would prepare version 05 *before* the beginning of the WGLC. At least that > was your positive answer to our question. > > In any case, I guess we can still prepare version 05 with pending comments > we received from the last IETF and another aspects we have observed in the > model, including YANG doctors’ comments. Correct? > > Best Regards > > > > > Inicio del mensaje reenviado: > > *De: *Linda Dunbar <[email protected]> > *Asunto: [I2nsf] WGLC and IPR poll for > draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-04* > *Fecha: *17 de abril de 2019, 16:54:13 CEST > *Para: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > Hello Working Group, > > This email starts a four weeks Working Group Last Call on > draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-04. > This poll runs until May 15, 2019. > > Authors: please update the draft per the comments and suggestions from > YANG Doctors. > > We are also polling for knowledge of any undisclosed IPR that applies to > this Document, to ensure that IPR has been disclosed in compliance with > IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details). > If you are listed as an Author or a Contributor of this Document please > respond to this email and indicate whether or not you are aware of any > relevant undisclosed IPR. The Document won't progress without answers from > all the Authors and Contributors. > > If you are not listed as an Author or a Contributor, then please > explicitly respond only if you are aware of any IPR that has not yet been > disclosed in conformance with IETF rules. > > > Thank you. > > Yoav & Linda > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf > > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [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] <[email protected]> > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf >
_______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
