Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Yoav Nir]

Thanks.

Yoav

(and this goes for the other thread too)

> On 20 Feb 2018, at 3:42, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Yoav,
> We authors will address the comments on the new WG document
> on NSF-Facing Interface Data Model and submit it before the I-D due.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Paul
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:14 AM, Yoav Nir  > wrote:
> Thanks to all who participated.
> 
> We believe that there is rough consensus to adopt this document as a starting 
> point for the group to work on.
> 
> Authors, please resubmit this document as a working group document with the 
> name draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-00.
> 
> Yoav
> (on behalf of the WG chairs)
> 
> 
>> On 27 Jan 2018, at 1:21, Linda Dunbar > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data 
>> Model
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>> 
>> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current 
>> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a 
>> working group to work on.
>> 
>> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are 
>> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> Linda & Yoav
>> 
>> ___
>> I2nsf mailing list
>> I2nsf@ietf.org 
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf 
>> 
> 
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> ===
> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Software
> Sungkyunkwan University
> Office: +82-31-299-4957
> Email: jaehoon.p...@gmail.com , 
> paulje...@skku.edu 
> Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php 
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong]

 Hi Yoav,
We authors will address the comments on the new WG document
on NSF-Facing Interface Data Model and submit it before the I-D due.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Paul


On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:14 AM, Yoav Nir  wrote:

> Thanks to all who participated.
>
> We believe that there is rough consensus to adopt this document as a
> starting point for the group to work on.
>
> Authors, please resubmit this document as a working group document with
> the name draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-00.
>
> Yoav
> (on behalf of the WG chairs)
>
>
> On 27 Jan 2018, at 1:21, Linda Dunbar  wrote:
>
>
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data
> Model
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-
> interface-data-model-04
>
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
> working group to work on.
>
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>
> Thank you.
>
> Linda & Yoav
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
>
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
>


-- 
===
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Email: jaehoon.p...@gmail.com, paulje...@skku.edu
Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Yoav Nir]

Thanks to all who participated.

We believe that there is rough consensus to adopt this document as a starting 
point for the group to work on.

Authors, please resubmit this document as a working group document with the 
name draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm-00.

Yoav
(on behalf of the WG chairs)


> On 27 Jan 2018, at 1:21, Linda Dunbar  wrote:
> 
>  
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data 
> Model
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04
>  
> 
>  
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.  
>  
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current 
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a 
> working group to work on.
>  
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are much 
> more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>  
> Thank you. 
>  
> Linda & Yoav
>  
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf 
> 
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Hyoungshick Kim]

Hi Linda and all,

 I am Hyoungshick Kim from Sungkyunkwan University.

I would like to support the WG adoption of this draft, “I2NSF
Consumer-Facing Interface YANG Data Model”.
Many use cases will covered by this interface.

Best regards,

Hyoung

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Linda Dunbar  wrote:
>
>
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data
> Model
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04
>
>
>
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>
>
>
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
> working group to work on.
>
>
>
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Linda & Yoav
>
>
>
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>



-- 
___
Hyoungshick (Hyoung) Kim,

Department of Software
College of Software
Office 27324, 2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-gu, Suwon, Gyeonggi-do 440-746, Korea
+82-31-299-4324 (mobile: +82-10-5557-3081)
hyo...@skku.edu
http://seclab.skku.edu/people/hyoungshick-kim/

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong]

Hi Linda,
Here are my answers as below:

> - Is Section 4 more on the “Structure of I2nsf Policy Rules”? instead of
“Objectives”?

=>  Yes, you are right.
Actually, this section is intended to show the structure of a security
policy
(having security rules for a given security policy)  and to explain the
objectives of its components.
In the next revision, we will replace "Objectives" with "The Structure and
Objective
of I2NSF Security Policy" for the title of Section 4.

> - Is the “+--rw generic-nsf” branch more for the “property” of the policy
(lack of better words)?
> More for describing the policy’s priority in relate to others and the
resolution strategy if there is any conflict?

=> A "generic-nsf" branch represents a list of security policies
whose security rules are specified as "eca-policy-rules" branches.
Among multiple security rules for a security policy, rule-priority is used
to determines the priorities of the rules, and a resolution strategy of
the security rules is used to resolve the conflicts of the rules in the
same security policy.

Since generic-nsf may be misleading, we will use
"i2nsf-security-policy" branch directly without using the "generic-nsf"
branch.
That is, we will remove the "generic-nsf" branch and will put
the i2nsf-security-policy on the place of the "generic-nsf" branch.

If you have further questions, plesse let me know.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Paul


On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 5:44 AM, Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.com>
wrote:

> Authors of draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-data-model:
>
>
> Clarification questions:
>
> -Is Section 4 more on the “Structure of I2nsf Policy Rules”?
> instead of “Objectives”?
>
> -Is the “+--rw generic-nsf” branch more for the “property” of the
> policy (lack of better words)? More for describing the policy’s priority in
> relate to others and the resolution strategy if there is any conflict?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks, Linda
>
>
>
> *From:* Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong [mailto:jaehoon.p...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 06, 2018 5:42 PM
> *To:* John Strassner <straz...@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* i2nsf@ietf.org; Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.com>; Jingyong
> (Tim) Kim <wlsdyd0...@nate.com>; Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com>;
> SecCurator_Team <skku_secu-brain_...@googlegroups.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/
> draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04
>
>
>
> Hi John,
>
> Thanks for your good suggestions on our draft. :-)
>
> We authors will clarify your suggestions on the next revision except the
> OO design for the YANG data model.
>
> The OO design takes time, so we will try to address it later.
>
>
>
> You can suggest the good OO design based on our next revision.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 8:31 AM, John Strassner <straz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> IMHO, the purpose of a WG adopting a draft is to acknowledge that the
> draft is a good starting point for the work that WG wants to accomplish. To
> be perfectly clear, I am NOT objecting on the completeness of the document.
> Rather, I am objecting on the technical correctness of the starting point.
>
>
> I do NOT feel that the proposed documents represent a good starting point.
> Ignoring things that can be easily fixed (e.g., grammar), there are a host
> of problems, such as:
>
>
>
>- sec 4: it is unclear what is meant by "Objectives", see below
>
>   - sec 4.1 does NOT define what an I2NSF SecurityPolicyRule is, or
> what its objective is
>
>   - secs 4.2 and 4.3 do provide definitions of events and conditions
> (though their grammar needs improvement)
>
>   - sec 4.4 provides a superficial definition of an action that needs
> tightening up
>
>
>
> The above are troublesome, as all definitions are clearly defined in the
> terminology draft. For a long time now... :-( And I really don't understand
> why this section is labeled "Objectives". Objectives of what? An event? of
> the data model? something else?
>
>
>
>- sec 5.1:  I don't understand the design of the YANG module at all
>
>  - the ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface module appears to describe a
> policy rule, but is given the name of an interface. In addition, why does 
> generic-nsf
> contain a policy (i2nsf-security-policy)? Put another way, the name of
> the module is the name of an interface, but doesn't describe an interface,
> and more importantly,
> NSFs do NOT contain policy rules - they are sent policy rules by
> the policy e

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Linda Dunbar]

Authors of draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-data-model:

Clarification questions:

-Is Section 4 more on the “Structure of I2nsf Policy Rules”? instead of 
“Objectives”?

-Is the “+--rw generic-nsf” branch more for the “property” of the 
policy (lack of better words)? More for describing the policy’s priority in 
relate to others and the resolution strategy if there is any conflict?


Thanks, Linda

From: Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong [mailto:jaehoon.p...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2018 5:42 PM
To: John Strassner <straz...@gmail.com>
Cc: i2nsf@ietf.org; Linda Dunbar <linda.dun...@huawei.com>; Jingyong (Tim) Kim 
<wlsdyd0...@nate.com>; Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com>; SecCurator_Team 
<skku_secu-brain_...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

Hi John,
Thanks for your good suggestions on our draft. :-)
We authors will clarify your suggestions on the next revision except the OO 
design for the YANG data model.
The OO design takes time, so we will try to address it later.

You can suggest the good OO design based on our next revision.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Paul

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 8:31 AM, John Strassner 
<straz...@gmail.com<mailto:straz...@gmail.com>> wrote:
IMHO, the purpose of a WG adopting a draft is to acknowledge that the draft is 
a good starting point for the work that WG wants to accomplish. To be perfectly 
clear, I am NOT objecting on the completeness of the document. Rather, I am 
objecting on the technical correctness of the starting point.

I do NOT feel that the proposed documents represent a good starting point. 
Ignoring things that can be easily fixed (e.g., grammar), there are a host of 
problems, such as:

   - sec 4: it is unclear what is meant by "Objectives", see below
  - sec 4.1 does NOT define what an I2NSF SecurityPolicyRule is, or what 
its objective is
  - secs 4.2 and 4.3 do provide definitions of events and conditions 
(though their grammar needs improvement)
  - sec 4.4 provides a superficial definition of an action that needs 
tightening up

The above are troublesome, as all definitions are clearly defined in the 
terminology draft. For a long time now... :-( And I really don't understand why 
this section is labeled "Objectives". Objectives of what? An event? of the data 
model? something else?

   - sec 5.1:  I don't understand the design of the YANG module at all
 - the ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface module appears to describe a policy 
rule, but is given the name of an interface. In addition, why does generic-nsf 
contain a policy (i2nsf-security-policy)? Put another way, the name of the 
module is the name of an interface, but doesn't describe an interface, and more 
importantly,
NSFs do NOT contain policy rules - they are sent policy rules by the 
policy engine
 - Worse, why are the event, condition, and action containers NOT inside 
the policy rule?
   - Same problem for figures 5.2-5.4, plus other problems (e.g., why is the 
resolution strategy NOT a part of the policy???)
   - the design of the condition clause is not scalable. In an OO design, one 
does NOT simply list a hundred attributes in a class. We decided that the YANG 
module would be designed in an OO style.
   - same problem for the action clause

Given the above, the rest of the YANG will be wrong.

Therefore, the document is NOT a good starting point, and will NOT accelerate 
the path to getting a good RFC.

regards,
John

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Linda Dunbar 
<linda.dun...@huawei.com<mailto:linda.dun...@huawei.com>> wrote:

The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data Model
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

Have requested working group adoption of this draft.

Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current 
content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a working 
group to work on.

While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are much 
more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".

Thank you.

Linda & Yoav


___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org<mailto:I2nsf@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf



--
regards,
John

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org<mailto:I2nsf@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf



--
===
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Email: jaehoon.p...@gmail.com<mailto:jaehoon.p...@gmail.com>, 
paulje...@skku.edu<mailto:paulje...@skku.edu>
Personal Homepage: 
http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php<http:

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong]

Hi John,
Thanks for your good suggestions on our draft. :-)
We authors will clarify your suggestions on the next revision except the OO
design for the YANG data model.
The OO design takes time, so we will try to address it later.

You can suggest the good OO design based on our next revision.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Paul

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 8:31 AM, John Strassner  wrote:

> IMHO, the purpose of a WG adopting a draft is to acknowledge that the
> draft is a good starting point for the work that WG wants to accomplish. To
> be perfectly clear, I am NOT objecting on the completeness of the document.
> Rather, I am objecting on the technical correctness of the starting point.
>
> I do NOT feel that the proposed documents represent a good starting point.
> Ignoring things that can be easily fixed (e.g., grammar), there are a host
> of problems, such as:
>
>- sec 4: it is unclear what is meant by "Objectives", see below
>   - sec 4.1 does NOT define what an I2NSF SecurityPolicyRule is, or
> what its objective is
>   - secs 4.2 and 4.3 do provide definitions of events and conditions
> (though their grammar needs improvement)
>   - sec 4.4 provides a superficial definition of an action that needs
> tightening up
>
> The above are troublesome, as all definitions are clearly defined in the
> terminology draft. For a long time now... :-( And I really don't understand
> why this section is labeled "Objectives". Objectives of what? An event? of
> the data model? something else?
>
>- sec 5.1:  I don't understand the design of the YANG module at all
>  - the ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface module appears to describe a
> policy rule, but is given the name of an interface. In addition, why does 
> generic-nsf
> contain a policy (i2nsf-security-policy)? Put another way, the name of
> the module is the name of an interface, but doesn't describe an interface,
> and more importantly,
> NSFs do NOT contain policy rules - they are sent policy rules by
> the policy engine
>  - Worse, why are the event, condition, and action containers NOT
> inside the policy rule?
>- Same problem for figures 5.2-5.4, plus other problems (e.g., why is
> the resolution strategy NOT a part of the policy???)
>- the design of the condition clause is not scalable. In an OO design,
> one does NOT simply list a hundred attributes in a class. We decided that
> the YANG module would be designed in an OO style.
>- same problem for the action clause
>
> Given the above, the rest of the YANG will be wrong.
>
> Therefore, the document is NOT a good starting point, and will NOT
> accelerate the path to getting a good RFC.
>
> regards,
> John
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Linda Dunbar 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG
>> Data Model
>>
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-inter
>> face-data-model-04
>>
>>
>>
>> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current
>> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
>> working group to work on.
>>
>>
>>
>> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
>> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>>
>>
>> Linda & Yoav
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> I2nsf mailing list
>> I2nsf@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> John
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
>


-- 
===
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Email: jaehoon.p...@gmail.com, paulje...@skku.edu
Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[John Strassner]

IMHO, the purpose of a WG adopting a draft is to acknowledge that the draft
is a good starting point for the work that WG wants to accomplish. To be
perfectly clear, I am NOT objecting on the completeness of the document.
Rather, I am objecting on the technical correctness of the starting point.

I do NOT feel that the proposed documents represent a good starting point.
Ignoring things that can be easily fixed (e.g., grammar), there are a host
of problems, such as:

   - sec 4: it is unclear what is meant by "Objectives", see below
  - sec 4.1 does NOT define what an I2NSF SecurityPolicyRule is, or
what its objective is
  - secs 4.2 and 4.3 do provide definitions of events and conditions
(though their grammar needs improvement)
  - sec 4.4 provides a superficial definition of an action that needs
tightening up

The above are troublesome, as all definitions are clearly defined in the
terminology draft. For a long time now... :-( And I really don't understand
why this section is labeled "Objectives". Objectives of what? An event? of
the data model? something else?

   - sec 5.1:  I don't understand the design of the YANG module at all
 - the ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface module appears to describe a
policy rule, but is given the name of an interface. In addition, why
does generic-nsf
contain a policy (i2nsf-security-policy)? Put another way, the name of the
module is the name of an interface, but doesn't describe an interface, and
more importantly,
NSFs do NOT contain policy rules - they are sent policy rules by
the policy engine
 - Worse, why are the event, condition, and action containers NOT
inside the policy rule?
   - Same problem for figures 5.2-5.4, plus other problems (e.g., why is
the resolution strategy NOT a part of the policy???)
   - the design of the condition clause is not scalable. In an OO design,
one does NOT simply list a hundred attributes in a class. We decided that
the YANG module would be designed in an OO style.
   - same problem for the action clause

Given the above, the rest of the YANG will be wrong.

Therefore, the document is NOT a good starting point, and will NOT
accelerate the path to getting a good RFC.

regards,
John

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Linda Dunbar 
wrote:

>
>
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data
> Model
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-
> interface-data-model-04
>
>
>
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>
>
>
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
> working group to work on.
>
>
>
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Linda & Yoav
>
>
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
>


-- 
regards,
John
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[elopez . ietf]

Yes, I support this draft, and thank the authors for their effort!
Cheers!Ed Lopez

On 1/26/2018 at 6:21 PM, "Linda Dunbar"  wrote:  
The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG
Data Model 


https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

Have requested working group adoption of this draft.   
Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft
current content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good
basis for a working group to work on. 
While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations
are much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you". 
Thank you.  
Linda & Yoav 

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Jong-Hyouk Lee]

Hi, all 

I support the adoption of this draft.

Cheers.
--
Jong-Hyouk Lee, living somewhere between /dev/null and /dev/random
Protocol Engineering Lab., Sangmyung University

#email: jonghy...@gmail.com
#webpage: https://sites.google.com/site/hurryon

> 2018. 2. 6. 21:56, Susan Hares <sha...@ndzh.com> 작성:
> 
> Linda and I2NSF WG:
>  
> I believe this drafts is ready for adoption.   I have followed this draft 
> since -00.txt.  This draft has sound implementation experience behind it.  
>  
> Cheerily, Susan Hares 
>  
> From: I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-boun...@ietf.org <mailto:i2nsf-boun...@ietf.org>] 
> On Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 6:22 PM
> To: i2nsf@ietf.org <mailto:i2nsf@ietf.org>
> Subject: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04
>  
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04>
>  
>  
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data 
> Model
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04
>  
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04>
>  
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.  
>  
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current 
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a 
> working group to work on.
>  
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are much 
> more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>  
> Thank you. 
>  
> Linda & Yoav
>  
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org <mailto:I2nsf@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf 
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf>
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Susan Hares]

Linda and I2NSF WG:

 

I believe this drafts is ready for adoption.   I have followed this draft
since -00.txt.  This draft has sound implementation experience behind it.  

 

Cheerily, Susan Hares 

 

From: I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 6:22 PM
To: i2nsf@ietf.org
Subject: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-
04

 

 

The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data
Model

 
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model
-04>
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-
04

 

Have requested working group adoption of this draft.  

 

Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn't mean that the draft current
content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
working group to work on.

 

While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".

 

Thank you. 

 

Linda & Yoav

 

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Sangwon Hyun]

Hi all,

I support the WG adoption of this data model draft of I2NSF NSF-facing
interface.
The feasibility of this data model has been verified with I2NSF hackathon
implementation, so I believe this is a good basis for WG collaboration.

Best regards,
Sangwon.

2018년 1월 27일 (토) 오전 8:22, Linda Dunbar 님이 작성:

>
>
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data
> Model
>
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04
>
>
>
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>
>
>
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
> working group to work on.
>
>
>
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Linda & Yoav
>
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[박정수]

Hi all,

I followed this work. I fully support the next step in WG.
I think data model is import to support vender-specific security functions.
Thanks.

Jungsoo

From: I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2018 8:22 AM
To: i2nsf@ietf.org
Subject: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04


The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data Model
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

Have requested working group adoption of this draft.

Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current 
content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a working 
group to work on.

While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are much 
more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".

Thank you.

Linda & Yoav

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Network Intelligence Proj]

Hello WG,

I support the adoption of draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04 as 
an i2nsf WG document.

Thanks,
Taejin

From: I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Linda Dunbar
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2018 8:22 AM
To: i2nsf@ietf.org
Subject: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04


The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data Model
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

Have requested working group adoption of this draft.

Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current 
content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a working 
group to work on.

While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are much 
more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".

Thank you.

Linda & Yoav



이 메일은 지정된 수취인만을 위해 작성되었으며, 중요한 정보나 저작권을 포함하고 있을 수 있습니다. 어떠한 권한 없이, 본 문서에 포함된 
정보의 전부 또는 일부를 무단으로 제3자에게 공개, 배포, 복사 또는 사용하는 것을 엄격히 금지합니다. 만약, 본 메일이 잘못 전송된 경우, 
발신인 또는 당사에 알려주시고, 본 메일을 즉시 삭제하여 주시기 바랍니다.
This E-mail may contain confidential information and/or copyright material. 
This email is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you receive this 
email by mistake, please either delete it without reproducing, distributing or 
retaining copies thereof or notify the sender immediately.
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[최영환]

Hi all,

I support the WG adoption of this draft, “I2NSF Consumer-Facing Interface YANG 
Data Model”.

BRs,
Younghwan Choi

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Linda Dunbar 
> wrote:

The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data Model
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

Have requested working group adoption of this draft.

Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current 
content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a working 
group to work on.

While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are much 
more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".

Thank you.

Linda & Yoav


___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf



--
===
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Email: jaehoon.p...@gmail.com, 
paulje...@skku.edu
Personal Homepage: 
http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php



--
===
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Email: jaehoon.p...@gmail.com, 
paulje...@skku.edu
Personal Homepage: 
http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Seil Jeon]

 I have followed this work. I think the draft is at a good start, based on
running code, so I support this draft for WG draft adoption.
I will try to give comments after this document adopted.


Regards,
Seil Jeon



On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Linda Dunbar 
wrote:

>
>
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data
> Model
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-
> interface-data-model-04
>
>
>
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>
>
>
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
> working group to work on.
>
>
>
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Linda & Yoav
>
>
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
>
___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

Re: [I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong]

Hi Linda, Yoav, and I2NSF fellows,
I support the WG adoption of this Data Model Draft for I2NSF NSF-Facing
Interface.
This draft will be used to let the NSF-Facing Interface be clarified and
implemented toward a mature interface.
As you know, the structures of the data model of this draft were verified
through the last four IETF Hackathon projects.

I agree at John Strassner's comments that it is necessary to reform this
data model to accommodate
the object-oriented concepts for efficient reuse.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Paul

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Linda Dunbar 
wrote:

>
>
> The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data
> Model
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-
> interface-data-model-04
>
>
>
> Have requested working group adoption of this draft.
>
>
>
> Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn’t mean that the draft current
> content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a
> working group to work on.
>
>
>
> While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are
> much more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".
>
>
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> Linda & Yoav
>
>
>
> ___
> I2nsf mailing list
> I2nsf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>
>


-- 
===
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Email: jaehoon.p...@gmail.com, paulje...@skku.edu
Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf

[I2nsf] WG Adoption call for https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

[Linda Dunbar]

The authors of I2NSF Network Security Functions-Facing Interface YANG Data Model
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-04

Have requested working group adoption of this draft.

Please bear in mind that WG Adoption doesn't mean that the draft current 
content is ready, WG Adoption only means that it is a good basis for a working 
group to work on.

While all feedback is helpful, comments pro or con with explanations are much 
more helpful than just "yes please" or "no thank you".

Thank you.

Linda & Yoav

___
I2nsf mailing list
I2nsf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf