> On 24 Mar 2016, at 12:42, Kent Watsen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > All, > > I believe that this thread's issue is resolved if the following text is added > to the Security Considerations section: > > > "This document defines a JSON encoding for YANG-defined data. It does not > defined any mechanisms for signing or encrypting said data. Use of an > external mechanism, such as PKCS #7 [RFC2315] or JOSE [RFC7515 and RFC7516], > is needed for such cases."
I am fine with adding this sentence although, as a matter of fact, the document does not define an infinite number of other mechanisms. There is no general requirement to support signing and encrypting for YANG-modelled data, also because, as Andy pointed out, our protocols so far demand a secure transport. I any case, we can make this edit only after IETF 95, right? Lada > > Elliot, Randy, Stephen? > > Kent // document shepherd > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
