On 6/10/14, 4:14 PM, "Jeffrey Haas" <[email protected]> wrote:
>The traceability draft should hopefully give you the "what was requested" >end of the auditing spectrum. (Please comment in that thread, if >otherwise.) I’ll read through the draft, at the latest when the adoption call hits, and make comments with this in mind. > >What I believe you're asking is roughly something like the following text >in >the architecture draft: > >X. Operational Considerations > >In order to facilitate troubleshooting of routing elements implementing >I2RS >agents, those routing elements should provide for a mechanism to show >actively provisioned I2RS state. Note that this information may contain >highly sensitive material subject to the Security Considerations of any >data >models implemented by that Agent and thus must be protected according to >those considerations. Yes, I think the only thing that misses is the need for it to be independent of the agent itself. Wes This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
