entstate-652 Security Considerations Text Changes
"Sharon Chisholm" <[email protected]> Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:21:16 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.entmib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4022403AD@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> |
<Juergen> q) I suggest to remove the following phrase from the security considerations section: ... ranging from those running on a port to those on an entire device, depending on the type of entity I think disruption of service is good enough and says all. Note that even disabling a port may not even lead to disruption of service if there are for example backup paths that get activated automatically (e.g., re-computation of a spanning tree in a bridged LAN)." </Juergen> Note that this text was added as a result of "#76: Security Considerations". You can read the details at http://rt.psg.com (ietf, ietf). It had asked that "The Security Considerations section should clearly articulate the operational risks of writing on entStateAdmin." I propose we not remove this additional information unless we have strong consensus given its origins. Sharon Chisholm Nortel Networks Ottawa, Ontario Canada