ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane-04

2010-11-29 09:32:55
Joel,

I had responded offline to Roni to get clarification on the reference part. I wasn't clear as to what what the informative reference should be.

Here was my response:

"rd> The idea was that the text in the draft is normative but the configuration examples are not as they are many different ways for the configurations to be constructed to accomplish the same output. While some are more optimized from a number of lines perspective they didn't map clearly enough between the two examples or as clearly illustrate the example logic.

I'm not sure what you meant by "where the correct syntax is specified". The syntax used is correct just there are various ways it can be configured. Some actually come down to personal preference so there is no "correct" in the sense of implementation uniqueness."

Can you clarify it for me?

I updated the other two points and went with "active" on the second.

Thanks,
Rodney




On 11/28/10 11:05 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Active is fine, turned on And always on have different meanings however.

I think we can fix appendix a with the appropriate informative reference
as specified.

Joel's widget number 2

On Nov 28, 2010, at 7:39, "Roni Even" 
<ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
<mailto:ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>> wrote:

Hi,

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane-04

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date: 2010-11-28

IETF LC End Date: 2010-12-3

IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC.
There are some nits and minor issue.

Major issues:

Minor issues: The example in appendix A are using syntax with no
reference. The text says that this is non normative text but I think
that it will be good to have a reference to the document where the
correct syntax is specified

Nits/editorial comments:

1.The first sentence of section 1 "Modern router architecture design
maintains a strict separation of forwarding and routing control plane
hardware and software." Talks about routing control plane while the
next sentence and the rest of the document calls it "router control plane"

2.In section 2 third paragraph "Additionally, there may be other
vendor or implementation specific protection mechanisms that are on by
default or always on. ". I suggest changing the text "are on" and
"always on" maybe to "active" or "turned on".

Thanks

Roni Even

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org <mailto:Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf