;
draft-ietf-netconf-partial-l...@tools.ietf.org
Subject: RE: secdir review of draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt
Tom,
Thanks for responding to my comments. Allow me to respond.
You wrote:
As a participant in netconf, I see authorization as one of those
topics which the Working Group
Wes Hardaker wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:55:15 -0700, Andy Bierman i...@andybierman.com
said:
AB Oherwise the agent would deadlock.
AB discard-changes does not affect the running configuration.
No, but it does affect the other users notion of changes. You should
never be allowed to
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:26:54 -0700, Andy Bierman i...@andybierman.com
said:
AB discard-changes only works because authorization is ignored,
AB otherwise the agent would be deadlocked.
Huh why would discard-changes be authorization ignorant??? That's
just as unsafe (unless you're only
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:55:15 -0700, Andy Bierman i...@andybierman.com
said:
AB Oherwise the agent would deadlock.
AB discard-changes does not affect the running configuration.
No, but it does affect the other users notion of changes. You should
never be allowed to discard changes that
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Hanna sha...@juniper.net
To: i...@ietf.org; sec...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-netconf-partial-l...@tools.ietf.org
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 4:28 PM
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to
Subject: Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Hanna sha...@juniper.net
To: i...@ietf.org; sec...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-netconf-partial-l...@tools.ietf.org
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 4:28 PM
I have
...@tools.ietf.org
Subject: RE: secdir review of draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt
Tom,
Thanks for responding to my comments. Allow me to respond.
You wrote:
As a participant in netconf, I see authorization as one of those
topics which the Working Group sees as necessary but cannot
-
From: Tom.Petch [mailto:sisyp...@dial.pipex.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:00 AM
To: Stephen Hanna; sec...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org;
draft-ietf-netconf-partial-l...@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt
- Original Message -
From
;
draft-ietf-netconf-partial-l...@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt
Stephen,
I think it is your first bullet point. We have not standardize it yet.
And so it is implementation dependent as to what
authorization is used.
Bert
Stephen
Stephen Hanna wrote:
Thanks to Dan and Bert for answering my question.
If most NETCONF implementations authenticate users
and implement some form of authorization scheme,
there should be no problem with including text
in draft-ietf-netconf-partial-lock-09.txt that
says NETCONF servers that
Wes Hardaker wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 08:26:54 -0700, Andy Bierman i...@andybierman.com
said:
AB discard-changes only works because authorization is ignored,
AB otherwise the agent would be deadlocked.
Huh why would discard-changes be authorization ignorant??? That's
just as
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
12 matches
Mail list logo
