Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tictoc-1588v2-yang-10
review-ietf-tictoc-1588v2-yang-10-secdir-lc-weiler-2018-10-03-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-tictoc-1588v2-yang
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2018-09-07
Requested 2018-08-24
Other Reviews Intdir Early review of -07 by Dave Thaler (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -09 by Sheng Jiang (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -09 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -10 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Yangdoctors Early review of -10 by Radek Krejčí (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Samuel Weiler
Review review-ietf-tictoc-1588v2-yang-10-secdir-lc-weiler-2018-10-03
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/6i2DCR6iGEjECRztOEuOViMkjOc
Reviewed rev. 10 (document currently at 11)
Review result Has Issues
Draft last updated 2018-10-03
Review completed: 2018-10-03

Review
review-ietf-tictoc-1588v2-yang-10-secdir-lc-weiler-2018-10-03

I wonder whether there should be a requirement to use authentication when making updates.  As the doc says:

   Write operations (e.g., edit-config) to these data nodes without
   proper protection can have a negative effect on network operations.

I'm sure someone will argue "if this is used in a closed network, we can avoid the use of authentication".  Prudence suggests that "closed" networks don't remain that way forever, and defense-in-depth is advisable.  Let's add a MUST or at least a SHOULD.