Re: ssh comments

[Margaret Wasserman <margaret@thingmagic.com>]

Hi Wes,

These are good comments.

I caught some (but not all) of these issues in the -03 revision. 
Since then, Simon pointed out that I mis-labeled the server and 
client in some of the example exchanges, so I need to do an editorial 
update, anyway, and I will attempt to address your other change in 
that update.

Thanks!
Margaret

At 2:26 PM -0800 3/7/05, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> comments on ssh-02 (I think there may be an -03 now [my net be down],
> and if so I haven't checked to see if they've been fixed).
>
> 1. Introduction:
>    XMLCONF->NETCONF
>    [may be in other locations too...  a search would be wise]
>
> 2. Starting NETCONF over SSH:
>    "the user (or script"
>       -> "the user (or application"
>
>    I do think that scripts will be used a lot by operators, but I also
>    think applications will which is more generic.  I don't think we
>    should use the word "script" in these documents.  It's definition
>    isn't well defined, unlike "application".
>
>    [in multiple locations within the doc]
>
> 2.1 Capabilities Exchange:
>
>   "As indicated in the example above," ->
>     "As indicated in the example above and as required by the 
> netconf protocol,"
>
>   "expect script" -> "application"
>     [We definitely shouldn't refer directly to "expect" IMHO]
>
>   "&lt; hello>" -> "<hello>"
>
>   If you're going to state the last paragraph (which is a duplicate of
>   what's in the netconf protocol) then you should also restate that
>   applications must not wait for the other side to complete the
>   sending of its <hello>.
>
> 3. using netconf over ssh
>
>   "]]>]]>, is sent after" -> "]]>]]>, MUST BE sent after".
>     Also, append "by both the client and the server" to the end of the
>     message.
>
> 4.
>
>   "An agend will processed RPC messages from the manager in the order
>   in which the are received."
>      ->
>   "An agent will process RPC messages from the manager in the order in
>   which the requests are received."
>
> 6. Security considerations
>
>   "configuration data" -> "configuration or state data"
>
>   "is sent to the server" -> "is sent to or received from the server"
>
>   "is sent to the client" -> "is sent to or received from the client"
>
>
>
>   "The identity of the server MUST be verified and authenticated..."
>
>     What does this MUST really mean?  To verify and authenticate the
>     server based on what policy?  This is almost crossing the boundary
>     between policy and interoperability.  I think what you really want
>     to say is more along the lines of:
>
>     "The identity of the server MUST be verified and authenticated
>     according to local policy..."
>
>     ???
>
> --
> "In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
>  and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett
>
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
> the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>


--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>