Hi Med,

> Hi Valery,
> 
> Thank you for the review.
> 
> You can see 
> https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-WG/policy-based-network-acl/issues/141 for 
> more details on how
> your comments are addressed, including the exact implemented changes.

Thank you.

I somehow missed the discussion about the new RADIUS attribute in the RADEXT WG 
(not a good thing for a co-chair,
my only excuse is that it was back in 2023 :-)). Thank you for initiating this 
discussion in the WG and for reminding me that it has been already done.

Regards,
Valery.

> See also inline.
> 
> Cheers,
> Med (as author).
> 
> > Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-ucl-acl
> > Title: A YANG Data Model and RADIUS Extension for Policy-based
> > Network Access Control Reviewer: Valery Smyslov Review result: Has
> > Nits
> >
> > I have reviewed this document as part of the security
> > directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being
> > processed by the IESG.  These comments were written primarily for
> > the benefit of the security area directors.
> > Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just
> > like any other last call comments.
> >
> > The document extends the YANG IETF Access Control List Module
> > defined in RFC
> > 8519 with elements policies based on group identity.
> >
> > The text for YANG module in the Security Considerations section is
> > based on the templeate defined in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis and
> > strictly follows this template. I have no problems with this text
> > (and if there were any problem with the template text itself, it
> > should be addressed in draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis).
> >
> > However, I have one question - it is not clear to me why
> > /acl:acls/ucl:endpoint-groups/ucl:endpoint-group and
> > /acl:acls/acl:acl/acl:aces/acl:ace/acl:matches/ucl:endpoint-group
> > subtrees are mentioned there as writable, while
> > /acl:acls/acl:acl/acl:aces/acl:ace/ucl:effective-schedule subtree
> > is mentioned as non-writable. Looking at the tree in section 5.1,
> > all these subtrees are marked as "rw". And it seems to me that
> > schedule must be configurable (thus writable). But I'm not a YANG
> > expert, sorry if I missed something.
> 
> [Med] Good catch. Added a discussion about effective-schedule under the 
> writeable data nodes as well.
> 
> >
> > Nits.
> > Section 9.1 last para: s/s ubtree/subtree
> 
> [Med] We don't have this in the md file, but this is present in the generated 
> txt. Tried some tweaks, but will leave it
> to the RFC editor if this persists.
> 
> >
> > With regard to RADIUS security, I'd suggest to also cite draft-
> > ietf-radext-deprecating-radius, since RFC 2865 is a bit dated.
> > draft-ietf-radext-radiusdtls-bis can also be cited in addition to
> > RFC 6614.
> 
> [Med] Good suggestions. Done.
> 
> >
> > I quickly looked over the definition of a new RADIUS attribute and
> > it seems OK to me, but I'd suggest to consult the RADIUS experts
> > in the RADEXT WG to be absolutely sure.
> 
> [Med] Already done as you can see at:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/bU35XCHTDtD52LMnnYook0MAEgU/
> ____________________________________________________________________________________________
> ________________
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent
> donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu 
> ce message par erreur, veuillez le
> signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
> falsifie. Merci.
> 
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
> information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
> this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
> modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to