Telechat Review of draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-10
review-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-10-secdir-telechat-wallace-2018-01-25-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 11) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2018-01-23 | |
| Requested | 2017-12-27 | |
| Authors | Ladislav Lhotka , Acee Lindem , Yingzhen Qu | |
| I-D last updated | 2018-01-25 | |
| Completed reviews |
Yangdoctors Early review of -05
by Martin Björklund
(diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -10 by Carl Wallace (diff) Genart Telechat review of -06 by Francis Dupont (diff) Opsdir Telechat review of -07 by Joe Clarke (diff) Rtgdir Telechat review of -08 by He Jia (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Carl Wallace |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 10 (document currently at 11) | |
| Result | Has nits | |
| Completed | 2018-01-25 |
review-ietf-netmod-rfc8022bis-10-secdir-telechat-wallace-2018-01-25-00
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. I found no issues with the draft. The security considerations section references NETCONF and RESTCONF for network security, with SSH and TLS used. This seems fine but I wonder if some guidance on using these a la RFC6125 would be helpful for some. One question in the security consideration section. Twice "/routing/ribs/rib" is referred to a list. Should this be "/routing/ribs"?