[OPSAWG] Interest to work on draft-sivakumar-yang-nat?

Dear all, In a discussion I had with one of the softwire wg co-chairs (cced), Ian suggested that we try to socialize this draft within opsawg: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sivakumar-yang-nat-05 I'm sending this message to solicit opsawg whether there is interest to review and (hopefully) t

Re: [OPSAWG] [Softwires] Comments on draft-sivakumar-yang-nat-05

Hi Tianran, Yes, we would like to have a consensus on the NAT YANG data model and proceed with its publication in opsawg. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] De la part de Tianran Zhou > Envoyé : mercredi 26 avril 2017 09:46 > À : Senthil Siv

Re: [OPSAWG] Comments on draft-sivakumar-yang-nat-05

Hi Tianran, Thank you for the comments. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Tianran Zhou [mailto:zhoutian...@huawei.com] > Envoyé : jeudi 18 mai 2017 10:11 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; Senthil Sivakumar (ssenthil); > opsawg@ietf.org > Cc : Ian Farrer > Obj

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll for draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained-06

Dear chairs, all, I support. I reviewed an earlier version of the draft; most of my comments were kindly addressed by Adrian. I still have some cosmetic comments on the latest version (already sent to Adrian), but those are easy to fix. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : OPSA

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained-01.txt

Hi Adrian, all, I reviewed this version. I do think it is ready for a WGLC. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] De la part de Adrian Farrel > Envoyé : jeudi 29 juin 2017 18:47 > À : opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-service-model-explained-01.txt

Re-, I confirm my review. The document is ready to move forward. That's not fast for such a stable and very scoped document. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Tianran Zhou [mailto:zhoutian...@huawei.com] > Envoyé : vendredi 30 juin 2017 09:27 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; adr

[OPSAWG] TR: New Version Notification for draft-sivakumar-yang-nat-07.txt

Hi Tianran, all, This updated version integrates most of the comments received from Dan (Wing) and yourself. I hope this version can be adopted. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org] > Envoyé : lundi 3 juillet 2017 13:4

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll for draft-sivakumar-yang-nat-07

Hi Joe, all, Unsurprisingly, I support the adoption of this document. FWIW, I don't have any IPR related to this document. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] De la part de Joe Clarke > Envoyé : jeudi 27 juillet 2017 16:09 > À : opsawg@iet

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll for draft-sivakumar-yang-nat-07

Hi Juergen, Thanks for sharing these comments. The document was already reviewed by NAT experts. More reviews are still welcome. We will solicit more once the document is adopted. FWIW, a partial implementation of this module is available at: https://git.fd.io/hc2vpp/tree/nat/nat-api/src/main

Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC for Service Models Explained

Hi all, I support advancing this document. Below some comments that can be easily fixed by the authors. - Remove RFC7426 and RFC8049 from the normative references. Those are cited as examples. - Simplify the text in the abstract as follows: OLD : The IETF has produced a considerable num

[OPSAWG] TR: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-00.txt

Dear all, The -00 version integrates the comments received during the Call for Adoption: - Clarify how Destination NAT is covered (Tianran) - Follow the NMDA guidelines (Juergen and Qin) - Include a generic structure for ALGs instead of listing supported ones (Juergen) - Include a discussion ab

Re: [OPSAWG] CLAT (was TR: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-00.txt)

Re-, Forwarded to the OPSAWG list. Please use this messages when replying. Apologies for the inconvenience. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN > Envoyé : vendredi 18 août 2017 16:19 > À : 'Lee Howard'; jordi.pa...@consulintel.es > Cc : opsawg-cha...@i

Re: [OPSAWG] CLAT (was TR: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-00.txt)

Hi Jordi, all, Thank you for the feedback. A new version that takes into account your suggestions is available online. Please check: URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-01.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-02.txt

Dear all, Fred (Baker) has kindly accepted to review the NPTv6 part of this specification. Many thanks to him. This new version integrates the comments raised by Fred. The main changes are: - Specify the interface(s) on which the translation function applies. The model allows to characterize

[OPSAWG] TR: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-03.txt

Dear all, This new version fixes a few typos and addresses a review from Tore Anderson (EAM part). FWIW, I'm pasting here the initial comments from Tore and how these are addressed in the new revision. === > Hi Mohamed. I'm not familiar with YANG, so I can't

[OPSAWG] TR: Request to review draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-01

Dear OPSAWG, I have requested an external review of the draft from a vendor who is not a co-author of the draft. Kris (cced) has kindly shared his comments about the current structure of the module and voiced for some features (mainly to allow for distinct pools; each with its specific parame

Re: [OPSAWG] TR: Request to review draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-01

Hi Joe, Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Joe Clarke [mailto:jcla...@cisco.com] > Envoyé : mercredi 27 septembre 2017 14:36 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; opsawg@ietf.org > Cc : Poscic, Kristian (Nokia - US) (kristian.po

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-04.txt

Dear WG, The new version takes into account the comments from Kris, mainly: - allow for multiple config within the same NAT instance. - bind an external interface with a specific NAT config. Chairs, now that we (authors) asked for external reviews covering (CLAT, EAM, NPTv6 and CGN), we do thin

[OPSAWG] TR: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-05.txt

Dear all, The new version clarifies how both stateless and stateful NAT64 are covered. This was a comment received offline from Rajiv Asati. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org] > Envoyé : lundi 2 octobre 2017 08:24 > À :

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-06.txt

Dear all, The new version fixes some cosmetic issues (mainly, indentation of the YANG module) and points to YANG1.1 RFC as per a comment received from Mahesh Jethanandani. We are waiting for the yang doctors review. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : internet-dra...@ietf.org

Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-06.txt

Hi Benoit, Thank you for this clarification. If Juergen is OK to provide his review before the WGLC, I would prefer to go that path. That is, wait for his early review, fix any comments from Juergen, and then go for a last call. Obviously, this is only my preference as an editor. I will defe

Re: [OPSAWG] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-06

Hi Jürgen, Thank you for the review. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Jürgen Schönwälder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Envoyé : vendredi 27 octobre 2017 20:14 > À : yang-doct...@ietf.org > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang@ietf.org; opsaw

Re: [OPSAWG] [yang-doctors] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-06

Re-, OK, thanks. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Envoyé : dimanche 29 octobre 2017 09:37 > À : yang-doct...@ietf.org > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : Re: [yang-doctors]

[OPSAWG] TR: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-07.txt

Dear all, This version tries to address the comments from Jüergen. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : internet-dra...@ietf.org [mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org] > Envoyé : lundi 30 octobre 2017 16:43 > À : Qin Wu; Senthil Sivakumar; BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; Suresh > Vinapamula;

Re: [OPSAWG] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-06

Hi Jüergen, Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de] > Envoyé : lundi 30 octobre 2017 17:22 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN > Cc : yang-doct...@ietf.org; draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang@ietf.org; > opsa

Re: [OPSAWG] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-06

Hi Juergen, Thank you for the follow-up and for the suggestions. I made the following changes to address your comments: - Revert back to the use of features. - Leave out the logging container for a future extension. - Remove the "VRF" part from the module, but maintain an extensible design to

Re: [OPSAWG] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang-06

Hi Juergen, all, An updated version integrating your comments is available online: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang/ Major changes are: - use of features - remove the logging configuration parameters - update the security section - add a section to discuss the rela

[OPSAWG] TR: Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-yang-02

Dear all, I’m sharing these comments from Mahesh (on another document), but which have the following implications on the NAT YANG module: - Cite I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams instead of including the description of the symbols. I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams will be cited as an inform

Re: [OPSAWG] IPR CALL: Please disclose any IPR related to draft-ietf-opsawg-nat-yang

Hi Joe, all, Happy New Year ! Apologies for the delay to answer this message (I was out of office). I don’t have any IPR nor I'm aware of any related to this draft. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Joe Clarke [mailto:jcla...@cisco.com] > Envoyé : vendredi 22 décembre 2017 16:

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-tgraf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh

Hi all, I support. FWIW, the authors may found some quick comments at: * pdf: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-tgraf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-05-rev%20Med.pdf * doc: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/master/draft-tgraf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6

[OPSAWG] TR: I-D Action: draft-boucadair-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-07.txt

Hi all, We updated the draft to better align with the ADD WG specs that are now in the RFC editor queue. We think that this version is stable enough to consider a WG call for adoption. Thank you. Cheers, Med -Message d'origine- De : I-D-Announce De la part de internet-dra...@ietf.o

Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Joe, All good points. Made the changes to fix those as you can see at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-boucadair-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns&url2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/boucadair/draft-boucadair-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns/master/draft-boucadair-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns.txt FYI,

Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 WG Last Call for draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-tls-07

Hi Tom, This is a fair comment. There is currently no recommendation on whether the initial full IANA-maintained modules should (not) be included or whether "an IANA-maintained module should always be published on its own". Publishing the module in a separate document has the same issues as

Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Qin, all, Thank you for the comments. For the second point, I agree the text is confusing. The procedure in the last sentence in the text you quoted refers to the DNR procedure that takes places in the LAN side. After thinking about this, I think we can just focus on what happens on the WAN

Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Dirk, Many thanks for the review. Please see inline. Cheers, Med De : dirk.von-h...@telekom.de Envoyé : jeudi 15 septembre 2022 17:04 À : opsawg@ietf.org Cc : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET Objet : RE: 🔔 CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS Dear WG, I have read the draft an

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Tom, Thanks for the comments. I see that Joe already answered the first comment. Thanks, Joe. I tweaked the IANA section to address the issue you raised: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-boucadair-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns&url2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/boucadair/draft-boucada

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-tgraf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh

Hi Thomas, Thank you for preparing this revised version. I think almost all my comments are addressed in this version. However, I still don’t see the need to have new registries that only mirror existing ones. For example, and unless I missed some subtleties, it would be sufficient to say

Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Christian, All good points. I implemented the changes that you can track here (or the full diff

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Tom, > > I was thinking that the IESG will complain at TLS being only 1.2, Don't think so. Please see: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bofreq-dekok-bofreq-dekok-radius-extensions-and-security-00/. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : OPSAWG De la part de tom petch > Envoyé :

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Re-, Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : tom petch > Envoyé : vendredi 16 septembre 2022 14:01 > À : tirumal reddy ; BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > > Cc : Joe Clarke (jclarke) ; opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for > En

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Chongfeng, Thank you for the comments. Please see inline. Cheers, Med De : OPSAWG De la part de Chongfeng Xie Envoyé : samedi 17 septembre 2022 02:21 À : opsawg@ietf.org Objet : Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS Hi, folks, I support the adoption of this

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-tgraf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh

Hi Benoît, Thank you for the follow-up. Actually, the more I look into this, the more I’m convinced that we don’t need a new registry for the flags and that the statement “Values for this Information Element are listed in the "IPFIX IPv6 SRH Flags" registry” is restrictive (inaccurate(?)). The

[OPSAWG] TR: New Version Notification for draft-boucadair-opsawg-rfc7125-update-00.txt

Hi all, This draft is triggered by the discussion with Thomas and Benoît and my review of draft-tgraf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh. I'm ccing the authors of RFC7125, FWIW. I mistakenly set the track to std instead of info (to be consistent with 7125). I hope we won't repeat the same issues in the cu

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: draft-tgraf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh

Hi Benoît, No problem to setup a quick call to discuss this if needed. For sure, the existing IPv6 SRH Flags registry is useful to associate some flags with a meaning. However, the observed values may include flags for which no meaning is defined (yet). That is why the statement ““Values for th

Re: [OPSAWG] comment for draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Asad, Thank you for the comment. I hear you. It is tempting to include such details into the SAP network model but we tried to avoid interfering with other device models or other network models (L3NM/L2NM). That's is why we have the following note in the draft: Advanced interface-specifi

Re: [OPSAWG] comment for draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Asad, Please see inline. Cheers, Med De : Arafat, Asad (Nokia - DE/Stuttgart) Envoyé : jeudi 22 septembre 2022 17:29 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET ; opsawg@ietf.org Cc : Arafat, Asad (Nokia - DE/Stuttgart) Objet : Re: comment for draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09 Thanks for the explanations Med..

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Rob, Thank you for the review. The changes can be tracked at: https://tinyurl.com/sap-latest Please note that I made a change to better allow for reuse of the SAP information in other modules (this can be tracked here: https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-WG/lxnm/commit/e8b406d7fad5225dd84ad7ff0

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Rob, all, One update related to your comment about how to identify "interfaces that are ready to host per-service sub-interfaces". We used to rely upon an implicit approach that combines the type of the attachment interface (phy, in particular) and the status, however after thinking about th

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Rob, Thanks for the follow-up. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Rob Wilton (rwilton) > Envoyé : jeudi 29 septembre 2022 15:24 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET ; > draft-ietf-opsawg-sap@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : RE: AD review of draft-ietf

Re: [OPSAWG] [IANA #1240167] IANA question regarding draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-01

Hi Amanda, all, One comment on this point: > When IANA links to this registry, will the link have to point to, > e.g., https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-routing/segment- > routing#the-specific-registry, or would it be sufficient to point > to https://www.iana.org/assignments/segment-rout

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-01.txt

Hi all, This version implements the changes that were discussed during the call for adoption, especially from Joe, Tom, Qin, Dirk, Christian, and Chongfeng. Also, it covers the deployment scenario where the NAS behaves as a DHCPv6 relay agent. To that aim, the document requests adding the new

[OPSAWG] RADIUS Attributes Permitted in DHCPv6 RADIUS Option: Encrypted DNS

Hi Bernie, all, I don't expect this to be problematic but I prefer to have a formal request to review https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-01#section-6.3 as it relates to a DHC registry. Thank you. Cheers, Med -Message d'origine- De : internet-d

Re: [OPSAWG] RADIUS Attributes Permitted in DHCPv6 RADIUS Option: Encrypted DNS

Re-, Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Alan DeKok > Envoyé : mercredi 5 octobre 2022 15:38 > À : Bernie Volz > Cc : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET ; > dh...@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : Re: [OPSAWG] RADIUS Attributes Permitted in DHCPv6 RADIUS > Option: En

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-02.txt

Re-, This version fixes the type for the ADN TLV. Thanks Bernie for catching that. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : I-D-Announce De la part de > internet-dra...@ietf.org > Envoyé : mercredi 5 octobre 2022 16:18 > À : i-d-annou...@ietf.org > Cc : opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : I-D

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-02.txt

Hi Alan, I added an appendix for this as you can see at: https://tinyurl.com/opsawg-add-latest. Do we need to sway more? Thanks. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Alan DeKok > Envoyé : jeudi 6 octobre 2022 14:52 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > Cc : opsawg@ietf.org > Obj

Re: [OPSAWG] IPR POLL: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns

Hi Joe, all, No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft. Cheers, Med De : Joe Clarke (jclarke) Envoyé : mercredi 12 octobre 2022 18:46 À : opsawg@ietf.org Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-...@ietf.org Objet : IPR POLL: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns Authors and contributo

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Ben, all, This specification targets typical broadband services in which the use of ECH is not relevant. It does not make sense for ISPs to be hosting multiple domains on the same IP address as the encrypted DNS resolver. Cheers, Med De : Add De la part de Ben Schwartz Envoyé : mercredi 12

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Alan, all, FYI, we do already have the following in the draft to pass RADIUS attributes in DHCPv6: In deployments where the NAS behaves as a DHCPv6 relay agent, the procedure discussed in Section 3 of [RFC7037] can be followed. To that aim, Section 6.3 updates the "RADIUS Attribute

Re: [OPSAWG] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC9291 (7162)

Hi Nikolai, all, Thank you for reporting this. This editorial erratum should be accepted. Thanks. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : RFC Errata System > Envoyé : jeudi 13 octobre 2022 13:23 > À : rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org > Cc : nmal...@ieee.org; BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > ;

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Re-, Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Alan DeKok > Envoyé : jeudi 13 octobre 2022 13:40 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > Cc : Ben Schwartz ; Joe Clarke (jclarke) > ; opsawg@ietf.org; rad...@ietf.org; > a...@ietf.org > Objet : Re: [Add] [OPSAWG] 🔔 WG LC: R

Re: [OPSAWG] [radext] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Joe, That’s because network services are isolated/segregated by adequate addressing schemes. I don’t expect that to change and see DNS service offered by operators be muxed with other customler-facing services they offer. Cheers, Med De : radext De la part de Joe Abley Envoyé : jeudi 13 oc

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Re-, Thanks for the feedback. Let's try to exercise this approach and see if there are not hidden complications vs. current design with known limitation. A drafty text (not yet in the main draft) can be seen at: https://github.com/boucadair/draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns/blob/main/draft-i

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Re-, Works for me. Thanks. I will run this candidate version with dhcwg as well. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Alan DeKok > Envoyé : vendredi 14 octobre 2022 16:00 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > Cc : Ben Schwartz ; Joe Abley > ; Ben Schwartz > ; Joe Clarke (jclarke)

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Bernie, dhcwg, We received a comment during the WGLC of this draft that might lead us to revisit the design you have reviewed recently. This alternative design mirrors what we have done in 7037 (dhcwg) but with DHCP options included in RADIUS. The candidate text is available at: https://g

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Hi Bernie, Thank you for the feedback. I have considered a registry to declare the options that can be echoed in the RADIUS attribute, but I then give it up because that list will be restricted anyway by policy: RADIUS implementations may support a configuration parameter to control the

Re: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-tls YANG Doctor review

Hi Thomas, I don't see why this draft should be an exception. BTW in addition to the yang doctors review, I suggest to also request an early secdir review. Thanks. Cheers, Med De : OPSAWG De la part de Thomas Fossati Envoyé : lundi 17 octobre 2022 12:10 À : opsawg Objet : [OPSAWG] draft-ietf

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Re-, Please see inline. Cheers, Med De : Add De la part de Bernie Volz Envoyé : lundi 17 octobre 2022 13:42 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET Cc : dh...@ietf.org; Joe Clarke (jclarke) ; opsawg ; ADD Mailing list ; rad...@ietf.org Objet : Re: [Add] [OPSAWG] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypt

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Re-, Point taken for the registry. For 4014bis, the issue is that there is no IANA registry for this and that 4014 have only a frozen list of options with SHOULD and like. That text should be fixed, hence https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-boucadair-dhcwg-rfc4014-update/. Cheers, Med De

Re: [OPSAWG] [dhcwg] [Add] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS

Re-, Thanks for the feedback. I submitted a new version which takes into account the comments received so far: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-04. Please let me know if I missed any of the comments. Thanks. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine-

Re: [OPSAWG] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-13: (with COMMENT)

Hi Éric, Thank you for the comments. Please see inline. I let my co-authors further comment as appropriate. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Éric Vyncke via Datatracker > Envoyé : mardi 18 octobre 2022 08:03 > À : The IESG > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service...@ietf.

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-05.txt

Hi all, This version merges the content that used to be in draft-boucadair-dhcwg-rfc4014-update. Bernie suggested offline that it is better to proceed with one single draft rather than two. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : OPSAWG De la part de internet- > dra...@ietf.org > E

[OPSAWG] RFC 4014: Request to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust

Hi Ralph, John, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns/ updates some material that was published in RFC4014. As RFC4014 was published before 10 November 2008, we may need to include a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work (https://trustee.ietf.org/documents/trust-legal-

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-05.txt

Hi Bernie, Thanks. A way to ease tracking the document by the dhw WG is that dhwg alias be added to "Send notices to" of this draft. Joe, can you please make that change into the tracker? Thank you. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Bernie Volz > Envoyé : mercredi 19 octobre

Re: [OPSAWG] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-13: (with COMMENT)

Hi Murray, Thanks for the comment. I suggest we go for these changes: (1) Section 3 OLD: Before using the model, the controller needs to establish topology visibility of the network and VPN. For example, the controller can use network information from [RFC8345], [I-D.ietf-opsawg-sap

Re: [OPSAWG] RFC 4014: Request to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust

Hi Ralph, Thank you for your positive answer. Much appreciated. Cheers, Med De : Ralph Droms Envoyé : jeudi 3 novembre 2022 18:28 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET Cc : jschn...@cisco.com; opsawg@ietf.org; dh...@ietf.org Objet : Re: RFC 4014: Request to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Rob, Thanks for the follow-up. Made some changes to hopefully fix the pending points: https://tinyurl.com/sap-latest. Also, added a NEW para to exemplify how controllers of each AS are using the model to provision inter-as VPN option A. This is to address a comment we received from an imp

Re: [OPSAWG] MINUTES: IETF 115 OPSAWG/Ops Area meeting

Hi Anthony, A request was made since 2022-10-12; no review received so far. Please see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns/reviewrequest/16465/. Cheers, Med De : OPSAWG De la part de Anthony Somerset Envoyé : jeudi 17 novembre 2022 07:14 À : Joe Clarke (jclarke

Re: [OPSAWG] [Add] [dhcwg] 🔔 WG LC: RADIUS Extensions for Encrypted DNS [EXTENDED]

Hi Bernie, Thanks for the comment. I agree that reference may be confusing for some readers. I went with a less verbose text by simply replacing the OLD reference with “Section 8.3 of [This-Document]”. Please see https://tinyurl.com/opsawg-add-latest. [This-Document] will be replaced by the RF

Re: [OPSAWG] Research on additional registry work

Hi Joe, all, Yes, I had a discussion with Benoît during the IETF meeting to see how to handle this. We agreed to proceed with at least two documents: * draft-boucadair-opsawg-rfc7125-update to update the TCP IPFIX RFC. * Edit a second draft to "clean" other entries in registry. This docu

[OPSAWG] TR: I-D Action: draft-boucla-opsawg-ipfix-fixes-00.txt

Hi Joe, all, FWIW, the simple fixes I-D is now public. Cheers, Med -Message d'origine- De : I-D-Announce De la part de internet-dra...@ietf.org Envoyé : mercredi 30 novembre 2022 09:45 À : i-d-annou...@ietf.org Objet : I-D Action: draft-boucla-opsawg-ipfix-fixes-00.txt A New Intern

Re: [OPSAWG] 🔔 WG LC: Export of Segment Routing over IPv6 Information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)

Hi all, This version addresses all the comments raised in my previous review of the document. I have only very few comments: * Section “5.9. srhActiveSegmentIPv6Type”: please add the pointer to the IANA registry under “Additional Information”. * Section 6.3: * Is there any SPRI

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Rob, Thanks for the follow-up. After rereading the initial proposed updated text, I think that you have a valid point about the need for more clarity when describing the relationship between the various status data nodes. I released -11 with an attempt to make that better. Both the data n

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-05.txt

Hi Thomas, all, Thanks for preparing this version. However, I think that not all the issues were fixed: * Section "5.9. srhActiveSegmentIPv6Type": please add the pointer to the IANA registry under "Additional Information". Please see the proposal from Benoît at: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Rob, The proposed edits look good to me. These are now implemented in the public -12. Thanks. cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Rob Wilton (rwilton) > Envoyé : vendredi 16 décembre 2022 12:11 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-sap@ietf.org; opsa

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-09

Hi Tom, all, We already have the following in the Introduction: A network may support multiple services, potentially of different types. Whether a SAP topology is dedicated to services of a specific service type, an individual service, or shared among many services of different type

Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-07

Hi Rob, Thanks for the review. Candidate changes to address this review can be tracked at: https://tinyurl.com/opsawg-add-latest Please find inline some inputs in addition to the replies from Alan. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Rob Wilton (rwilton) > Envoyé : lundi 19 d

Re: [OPSAWG] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-12

Hi Linda, Thank you for the review. SAPs can be seen as an abstraction of customer-facing Termination Points (TPs) with specific service provisions. However, a difference between SAPs and TPs is that (1) links are terminated by a single TP, not sets of TPs while (2) an Attachment Circuit can

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-05.txt

Hi Thomas, Thanks for preparing this revised version. The changes look good. However, and as discussed previously, I was expecting to see s/packet SHOULD be preserved in the IPFIX export according/packet should be preserved in the IPFIX export according. Some minor nits: * Please note that there

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh-05.txt

Hi Benoît, You got it. We are not defining a new ordering behavior, but simply adhering to what the IPFIX spec says on this matter. I would mix your proposed wording with what Thomas already implemented in https://raw.githubusercontent.com/graf3net/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh/main/draft-ie

[OPSAWG] Shepherd Write-up for draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh

Hi all, FWIW, the shepherd writeup for draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh is now available: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-srv6-srh/shepherdwriteup/ Unless there are comments about the writeup, I think that the document can be sent to the IESG for publication. Cheers,

Re: [OPSAWG] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-12

Hi Linda, Sure. Please see https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-13. Thanks. Cheers, Med De : Linda Dunbar Envoyé : mercredi 4 janvier 2023 17:47 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET ; gen-...@ietf.org Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-sap@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org; opsaw

Re: [OPSAWG] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-13

Hi Ivaylo, Thank you for the review. This will be ACKed in the next iteration: https://tinyurl.com/sap-latest. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Ivaylo Petrov > Envoyé : lundi 9 janvier 2023 22:47 > À : draft-ietf-opsawg-sap@ietf.org; sec...@ietf.org; T

[OPSAWG] draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang: AC provisioning vs. (slice) service provisioning

Hi all, (ccing OPSAWG as the generic AC work may belong there) draft-ietf-teas-ietf-network-slice-nbi-yang includes some very few details about ACs, but those details can be hardly useful to actually provision ACs. Assuming that ACs will be created by "some magic" is not helpful either. An app

Re: [OPSAWG] Dnsdir last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-07

Hi Ralf, Thank you for the review. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Ralf Weber via Datatracker > Envoyé : mercredi 11 janvier 2023 13:14 > À : dns...@ietf.org > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns@ietf.org; last- > c...@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org >

Re: [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-add-encrypted-dns-08.txt

Hi all, This version takes into account the AD and dnsdir reviews. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : OPSAWG De la part de internet- > dra...@ietf.org > Envoyé : mercredi 11 janvier 2023 14:37 > À : i-d-annou...@ietf.org > Cc : opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : [OPSAWG] I-D Action: draf

Re: [OPSAWG] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-13: (with COMMENT)

Hi Lars, Thanks for the review. Updated the draft to fix the nits https://github.com/IETF-OPSAWG-WG/lxnm/commit/f19848036917bf9821f0088eba26eed34d8e00c0. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Lars Eggert via Datatracker > Envoyé : vendredi 13 janvier 2023 13:29 > À : The IESG >

Re: [OPSAWG] Rtgdir telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-13

Hi Mach, Thanks for the review. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Mach Chen via Datatracker > Envoyé : mardi 17 janvier 2023 09:29 > À : rtg-...@ietf.org > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-sap@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org; > opsawg@ietf.org > Objet : Rtgdir telechat review of draft-i

Re: [OPSAWG] Yangdoctors telechat review of draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-13

Hi Martin, Thanks for the review. Good catch. Fixed in -14. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Martin Björklund via Datatracker > Envoyé : mardi 17 janvier 2023 13:03 > À : yang-doct...@ietf.org > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-sap@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org; > opsawg@ietf.org > O

Re: [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: An Update to the tcpControlBits IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Information Element

Hi Joe, all, I support this work, obviously. FWIW, I don't have any IPR related to this I-D. Cheers, Med De : OPSAWG De la part de Joe Clarke (jclarke) Envoyé : mardi 17 janvier 2023 17:25 À : opsawg@ietf.org Objet : [OPSAWG] CALL FOR ADOPTION: An Update to the tcpControlBits IP Flow Informat

Re: [OPSAWG] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsawg-sap-14: (with COMMENT)

Hi Roman, Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Roman Danyliw via Datatracker > Envoyé : mardi 17 janvier 2023 22:08 > À : The IESG > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-...@ietf.org; opsawg-cha...@ietf.org; > opsawg@ietf.org; adr...@olddog.co.uk; adr...@olddog.co.uk > Objet

  1   2   3   4   5   >