Dear all,

[copying the security ADs to make sure the new security section is fine]
Let's separate the two issues

1. the multiple URLs in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-12.txt
Basically, I agree with Jürgen
I see section 4.7:

       This section MUST be patterned after the latest approved template
       (available athttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/
   <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/yang-security-guidelines>
       yang-security-guidelines
   
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/yang-security-guidelines>).Section
 7.1
   <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-12#section-7.1>  
contains the security
       considerations template dated 2013-05-08.  Authors MUST check the WEB
       page at the URL listed above in case there is a more recent version
       available.

Then, I see section 7:

      The following section contains the security considerations template
       dated 2010-06-16.

Not sure why it contains this cut/paste? It should just say: the latest version is at this URL.
Then, I see in the same section:

   This section MUST be patterned after the latest approved
       template (available at

        http://www.ops.ietf.org/netconf/yang-security-considerations.txt

This page is not found.
This should be corrected in rfc6087bis.


2. the new security guidelines must include RESTCONF.
At this point, this is a blocking factor for the publication of YANG module. As an example, draft-ietf-lmap-yang-11 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lmap-yang/>, A YANG Data Model for LMAP Measurement Agents, on the telechat tomorrow. As mentioned the most up to date version is https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines

Here is the proposal, discussed on the YANG doctors list:


            OLD

       The YANG module defined in this memo is designed to be accessed
       via the NETCONF protocol [RFC6241]. The lowest NETCONF layer is
       the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement
       secure transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The NETCONF
       access control model [RFC6536] provides the means to restrict
       access for particular NETCONF users to a pre-configured subset
       of all available NETCONF protocol operations and content.

       NEW

       The YANG module defined in this memo is designed to be accessed
       via the NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040] protocol. The
       lowest NETCONF layer is the secure transport layer, and
       mandatory-to-implement is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242], while
       the lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTP, and the
       mandatory-to-implement secure transport is Transport Layer
       Security (TLS) [RFC5246].
       The NETCONF access control model [RFC6536] provides the means to
       restrict access for particular NETCONF or RESTCONF users to a
       pre-configured subset of all available NETCONF or RESTCONF
       protocol operations and content.

Any objections?
Have covered all that we need for the new RESTCONF protocol?

Regards, Benoit


Hi,

this came up during IESG processing of a YANG module - is there a new
security guideline boilerplate text covering RESTCONF? This was
briefly discussed on the yang-doctors but somehow the discussion
stopped because RESTCONF was not published yet at that time. I think
this affects draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-12.txt.

draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-12.txt has several pointers to read
online documents - why do we need several points? I think some are
also not working. Ideally, there should be a single stable URL.

/js


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

Reply via email to