Subject: Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-24: (with COMMENT)

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 08:51:25 -0700

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain-24: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for addressing my DISCUSS.

Maybe it is just me, but it would have helped to say that "key string in
ASCII" is a passphrase. I was not sure whether "key string" was a term
used in Routing and/or YANG circles. The best place to clarify this is in
Section 2   (Problem Statement)

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 18:14:14 +0000

Hi Alexey, 

See below. 

>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-key-chain/

Typically, authentication keys using for applications such as routing
protocols have been configured in ASCII or hexadecimal and still referred
to as keys. For example, refer to RFC 7474. I believe the term
“passphrase” would be wrong as this seems to imply something like an SSH
paraphrase. 

Thanks,
Acee 
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>rtgwg mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg