[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: action RPC I-D



Balazs Lengyel wrote:
Hello,
You are right, we need access control.

For this reason each action defined in the data model should be defined as read/write/disturb-traffic. read: it only reads configuration and state data and doesn't effect the traffic
write: it writes configuration data, but does not disturb the traffic
disturb-traffic: means it can do anything.


I prefer these well-known hierarchical enumerations for max-access:

   read-only       (read or notify)
   read-write      (all operations except create & delete)
   read-create     (all access)


Andy


One can debate that these are the good categories for access control. Still the basic statement is that for each action defined in the data model you need to specify it's access properties in the data model as well.
Balazs

Andy Bierman wrote:
Your access control model should be more robust than
simply allowing user X to do anything called <action>.
I don't see what benefit an intermediate SW component
can realize if an extra generic container is added to <rpc>.





--
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/>