Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09
review-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09-secdir-lc-smyslov-2019-05-08-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 13)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2019-05-16
Requested 2019-05-02
Authors Tarek Saad , Rakesh Gandhi , Xufeng Liu , Vishnu Pavan Beeram , Igor Bryskin
I-D last updated 2019-05-08
Completed reviews Yangdoctors Early review of -01 by Jan Lindblad (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -06 by Ines Robles (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -09 by Valery Smyslov (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -09 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Valery Smyslov
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-types by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/UXVej8W-ylOb1n0fH8Gsl5jWNDI
Reviewed revision 09 (document currently at 13)
Result Has nits
Completed 2019-05-08
review-ietf-teas-yang-te-types-09-secdir-lc-smyslov-2019-05-08-00
Reviewer: Valery Smyslov	
Review result: Ready with Nits

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.


The draft defines a set of common YANG elements (typedefs, identities and groupings)
that are intended to be used in Traffic Engineering related YANG modules.
The draft as such doesn't have security implications. The Security Considerations
section contains general advices on using YANG with data management
protocols (like NETCONF or RESTCONF), which are applicable when 
these definitions are imported and used in other YANG modules.
The advices include using secure protocols (SSH for NETCONF and TLS1.3 for RESTCONF)
and implementing access control for sensitive YANG data nodes. 

Nit: I don't think that reference to TLS1.3 (RFC8446)
should be normative. In my understanding readers of this document
are not obliged to read and fully understand the details of TLS to be able
to import the definitions and create a TE-related YANG module.