Christopher Inacio has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-ucl-acl-13: Discuss

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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ucl-acl/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

* This statement seems like the IETF is making management policy decisions
outside our authority; can we remove this?
  > 486    Users accessing an enterprise device should be strictly controlled.


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

Thanks to all the reviewers for the insightful comments and the authors that
already responded to them; very helpful.  The document shows the results of its
in depth review.

* Can there be a definition of “enterprise” or “enterprise device” added to
Section 2.  Something like:
  > Enterprise device: for the purposes of this document, an enterprise device
  is a computing device which falls under the access control domain of
  centrally managed authority.  A personal device (bring your own device
  (BYOD)) may temporarily be considered an enterprise device when it is used to
  access resources controlled by the centrally managed authority.

  I can’t bring together the concepts in the document of BYOD (for example) and
  then the language in section 4.2.2; or I’m missing a distinction by what is
  meant by “enterprise device” in 4.2.2

NITS:

* "R&D Regular" (in the text) doesn't exist in the table
  > 441    groups may share several common criteria.  That is, user group
  > 442    criteria are not mutually exclusive.  For example, the policy
  > 443    criteria of user groups R&D Regular and R&D BYOD may share the same
  > 444    set of users that belong to the R&D organization, and differ only in
  > 445    the type of clients (firm-issued clients vs. users' personal
  > 446    clients).  Likewise, the same user may be assigned to different user
  > 447    groups depending on the time of day or the type of day (e.g.,
  > 448    weekdays versus weekends), etc.
  >
  > 450        +============+==========+===================================+
  > 451        | Group Name | Group ID | Group Description                 |
  > 452        +============+==========+===================================+
  > 453        | R&D        | foo-10   | R&D employees                     |
  > 454        +------------+----------+-----------------------------------+
  > 455        | R&D BYOD   | foo-11   | Personal devices of R&D employees |
  > 456        +------------+----------+-----------------------------------+
  > 457        | Sales      | foo-20   | Sales employees                   |
  > 458        +------------+----------+-----------------------------------+
  > 459        | VIP        | foo-30   | VIP employees                     |
  > 460        +------------+----------+-----------------------------------+
  >
  > 462                         Table 1: User Group Examples
  >



_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to