From nobody Thu Apr 3 18:22:48 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3598C1A01E2 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:22:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.011 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xP8ItYcQhXf5 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:22:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AD061A0426 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:22:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56713633EB for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 01:22:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P+2Xx+f8A+GL for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 21:22:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (ip-64-134-239-26.public.wayport.net [64.134.239.26]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0533562AAA for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 21:22:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <533E094B.3010706@htt-consult.com> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 18:22:19 -0700 From: Robert Moskowitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: HIP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/ppb5iB4dHw494ZqIDOZptH68uS8 Subject: [Hipsec] HIP & EAP X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 01:22:47 -0000 Long ago Samu wrote an ID for EAP within HIP. I need HIP within EAP, as an EAP method. Kind of like RFC 5106. Why? To work over 802.1X and within PANA. Details available in a bit. Has anyone written such an ID? From nobody Thu Apr 3 18:36:58 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B7411A03BC for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:36:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.503 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.503 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9mIXcnlVRhCi for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imx12.toshiba.co.jp (imx12.toshiba.co.jp [61.202.160.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2A01A003B for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from arc11.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.90.127]) by imx12.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id s341afRh012544; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:36:41 +0900 (JST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arc11.toshiba.co.jp id s341afDv002783; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:36:41 +0900 (JST) Received: from ovp11.toshiba.co.jp [133.199.90.148] by arc11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id LAA02782; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:36:41 +0900 Received: from mx12.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id s341aeFn008073; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:36:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from TGXML208.toshiba.local by toshiba.co.jp id s341aeEO010986; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:36:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from TGXML210.toshiba.local ([169.254.4.147]) by TGXML208.toshiba.local ([133.199.70.17]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:36:40 +0900 From: To: , Thread-Topic: [Hipsec] HIP & EAP Thread-Index: AQHPT6RkVR3x5Lr+6keVn+cmx489rJsArGEA Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 01:36:40 +0000 Message-ID: <674F70E5F2BE564CB06B6901FD3DD78B2721EE7F@TGXML210.toshiba.local> References: <533E094B.3010706@htt-consult.com> In-Reply-To: <533E094B.3010706@htt-consult.com> Accept-Language: ja-JP, en-US Content-Language: ja-JP x-originating-ip: [133.196.20.215] msscp.transfermailtomossagent: 103 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/1qrw21q_rXvMYbnSjweXE3Ze6F4 Subject: Re: [Hipsec] HIP & EAP X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 01:36:55 -0000 I am interested in writing up such an I-D if it is not done yet. Yoshihiro Ohba -----Original Message----- From: Hipsec [mailto:hipsec-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Moskowitz Sent: Friday, April 4, 2014 10:22 AM To: HIP Subject: [Hipsec] HIP & EAP Long ago Samu wrote an ID for EAP within HIP. I need HIP within EAP, as an EAP method. Kind of like RFC 5106. Why? To work over 802.1X and within PANA. Details available in a bit. Has anyone written such an ID? _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From nobody Thu Apr 3 19:12:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700521A0522 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 19:12:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ehhH9f56vF2W for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 19:12:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8CC41A0505 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 19:12:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CFE7633ED; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 02:12:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p-gl6qXAC5iX; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 22:11:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (ip-64-134-239-26.public.wayport.net [64.134.239.26]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1ECF4633EB; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 22:11:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <533E14ED.3040208@htt-consult.com> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 19:11:57 -0700 From: Robert Moskowitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp, hipsec@ietf.org References: <533E094B.3010706@htt-consult.com> <674F70E5F2BE564CB06B6901FD3DD78B2721EE7F@TGXML210.toshiba.local> In-Reply-To: <674F70E5F2BE564CB06B6901FD3DD78B2721EE7F@TGXML210.toshiba.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/vwcOfIpIkq9xXtQKc2rmvPhEQnA Subject: Re: [Hipsec] HIP & EAP X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 02:12:20 -0000 Yes, Yoshi has one of the use cases. ;) Another is automotive ethernet. On 04/03/2014 06:36 PM, yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp wrote: > I am interested in writing up such an I-D if it is not done yet. > > Yoshihiro Ohba > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hipsec [mailto:hipsec-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Moskowitz > Sent: Friday, April 4, 2014 10:22 AM > To: HIP > Subject: [Hipsec] HIP & EAP > > Long ago Samu wrote an ID for EAP within HIP. > > I need HIP within EAP, as an EAP method. Kind of like RFC 5106. > > Why? To work over 802.1X and within PANA. Details available in a bit. > > Has anyone written such an ID? > > > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec > From nobody Fri Apr 4 10:47:07 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF581A0296 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:47:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_27=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id No4vJDeuEAS8 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-f169.google.com (mail-yk0-f169.google.com [209.85.160.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51BB21A02C7 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:46:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 142so3200268ykq.14 for ; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 10:46:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=an40fNjrVZuIgcIo7PBABKVg8Goq8Z2h1wZDnsft1uo=; b=QidEBK9CAvk2r0GEm404ajsyD1lb6kn/Ndw020hmFHgDuGP42UD4RKIEmyjho9z4xJ 4IrNQmzMVgiHIeWrrzzkWS3mQWLi8mTyeyTrAvUtUlttwC7R8qys5s4aLmnDQzyXTc3x a57amBoFFVU5xLfeolYTs+OVprnexe8VePBghuh/lcmaQmmGD2C1xVXCAlrZr/LSP49x SPUpEFbEHKwTPI18M4NSHFytzp9WUQYwLCnZchmpmOeC4xCtIxVl/UzMZMYQmVBsRVN2 U71ML5l6uCCEB6Bai/7RMtsaIcHWmIEhvY3i8gxb4nh0ErIsFrbdbIuDbXp+9gezpFEl MqdA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnHISg9674OWJjg0zxkU+y6om+uPmy2HHxlWoh3ER+IT0Vq0z5eAbbPgA6iP1WngA2kDKst MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.7.47 with SMTP id 35mr18634349yho.23.1396633611458; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 10:46:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.142.131 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:46:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [50.243.109.246] Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:46:51 -0700 Message-ID: From: David Mattes To: hipsec Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134036a4aec0a04f63b1a98 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/SAa26ribYOCT4Rb4EYlFppxVMhI Subject: [Hipsec] 4423-bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 17:47:04 -0000 --001a1134036a4aec0a04f63b1a98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I wanted to add that I think the 4423-bis draft looks great and that Asguard Networks is looking forward to seeing this published! This will be an important step for our use of HIP in our shipping products. We are waiting for final publication to begin implementation of HIPv2. Thank you, David -- David Mattes Founder, Asguard Networks 425-213-4691 (c) dm.asguard (skype) http://asguardnetworks.com --001a1134036a4aec0a04f63b1a98 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

I wanted to add that I think = the 4423-bis draft looks great and that Asguard Networks is looking forward= to seeing this published! =A0This will be an important step for our use of= HIP in our shipping products. =A0We are waiting for final publication to b= egin implementation of HIPv2.

Thank you,
David
--
David Mattes
Founder, Asguard Networks
425-213-4691 (c)
dm.asguard (skype)
--001a1134036a4aec0a04f63b1a98-- From nobody Sun Apr 6 14:09:01 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 528E61A02CD for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 14:08:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.312 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.312 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hscDdhUMKLJ2 for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 14:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stl-mbsout-02.boeing.com (stl-mbsout-02.boeing.com [130.76.96.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D2471A04C1 for ; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 14:08:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by stl-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id s36L8l44005513; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 16:08:47 -0500 Received: from XCH-PHX-512.sw.nos.boeing.com (xch-phx-512.sw.nos.boeing.com [10.57.37.29]) by stl-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id s36L8bIj005132 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Sun, 6 Apr 2014 16:08:37 -0500 Received: from XCH-BLV-505.nw.nos.boeing.com (130.247.25.195) by XCH-PHX-512.sw.nos.boeing.com (10.57.37.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.174.1; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 14:08:36 -0700 Received: from XCH-BLV-104.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.153]) by XCH-BLV-505.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.5.59]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Sun, 6 Apr 2014 14:08:35 -0700 From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: "'Gonzalo Camarillo'" , HIP Thread-Topic: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis Thread-Index: AQHPRDCNtNNpB0OyPE2REkoCBHWZlJsFLphw Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2014 21:08:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532AD28B.4010204@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <532AD28B.4010204@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-MML: disable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/53whqybe2lpKsU0GNwMFZt42lv4 Subject: Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 21:08:59 -0000 > Hi, >=20 > we WGLCed this draft some time ago, but we are WGLCing it again at this > point to make sure people are happy with the current version: >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis/ >=20 > This WGLC will end on April 6th. Please, send your comments to this > list before then. >=20 I read the revised version again today and believe it is ready to publish o= nce the below nits are taken care of. I believe that they are mostly edito= rial but I'd be happy to discuss on the list. - Tom Section 1 --------- Old text: There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity. New text: There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity (although ther= e may be transient periods of time such as key replacement when more than o= ne identifier may be active). The reference to Section 7 should be to Section 6. The first use of ESP should be cited (it is later cited in 6.1). Section 2 --------- Old text: Public is | | | a relative term here, ranging from known to peers | | | only to known to the World. | New text: Public is | | | a relative term here, ranging from "known to | | | peers only" to "known to the world." | Again, the reference to HIP base exchange should be Section 6, not Section = 7 Section 3 ----------- Old text: o The names should have a localized abstraction so that it can be used in existing protocols and APIs. New text: o The names should have a localized abstraction so that they can be used in existing protocols and APIs. Section 4 --------- Old text: a public-key-based HI can authenticate the HIP packets and protect them for man-in-the-middle attacks. New text: a public-key-based HI can authenticate the HIP packets and protect them from man-in-the-middle attacks. s/HIP BEX/HIP base exchange Section 4.2 ----------- s/through out/throughout Section 4.3 ----------- s/HIts/HITs Section 4.5 ----------- s/types of application/types of applications Old text: For instance, Light-weight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or in a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis]. New text: For instance, a directory based on the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis] may be used. s/associate with/associated with s/a LDAP or DHT/an LDAP-based directory or DHT Section 5 --------- Old text: As discussed above, the IP addresses can be seen to be a confounding of routing direction vectors and interface names. New text: As discussed above, the IP addresses can be seen to be a confounding of computing platform names and interface names. (or else delete this sentence as it is somewhat redundant with other senten= ces below; I just felt that the "confounding" aspect relates to EIDs and lo= cators instead of routing direction vectors) Section 8 --------- s/cannot distinguished/cannot be distinguished Section 9 --------- s/intestigating/investigating s/Particularly, so called bloom filters/In particular, so-called Bloom filt= ers (also in section 12.3, 'Bloom' is not capitalized; it should be either be c= apitalized everywhere (typical usage that I have seen) or lower case everyw= here) s/datastructures/data structures s/by HIP working group/by the HIP working group Section 10 ---------- s/in a similar vain/similar to how Old text: The implementations should provide for a policy of initiator HIT to responder HIT. New text: The implementations should provide for a policy mapping of initiator HITs to responder HITs. Section 11 ---------- s/With the exception High-Performance/With the exception of High-Performanc= e s/As majority of the/As the majority of the s/More agile IPv6 interoperability as discussed in Section 4.4./More agile = IPv6 interoperability can be achieved, as discussed in Section 4.4. s/An addition, the underlying/Additionally, the underlying s/halves the size of access control lists/can potentially halve the size of= access control lists the reference [scultz-intermittent] should probably be spelled [schuetz-int= ermittent] Section 11.3 ------------ s/accomodate/accommodate s/strictly speaking mandatory/mandatory Section 12.2 ------------ s/credit-based authorization approach Host Mobility/credit-based authorizat= ion approach for host mobility Section 12.3 ------------- s/There has been attempts/There have been attempts s/the protection of malign data flows/?? s/which the the end-hosts/which the end-hosts Section 15 ---------- s/RFC 4424/RFC 4423 From nobody Tue Apr 8 03:25:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD7F1A02CC for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 03:25:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.24 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.24 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ygJqioG1Kc6c for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 03:25:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sesbmg21.mgmt.ericsson.se (sesbmg21.ericsson.net [193.180.251.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71F5E1A01E9 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 03:25:25 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb31-b7f688e000003e64-70-5343ce8e9a1e Received: from ESESSHC022.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg21.mgmt.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id D4.51.15972.E8EC3435; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:25:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [147.214.153.162] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.86) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:25:17 +0200 Message-ID: <5343CE8D.3020506@ericsson.com> Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:25:17 +0300 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Henderson, Thomas R" , HIP References: <532AD28B.4010204@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprELMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvjW7fOedgg2XXrS2mLprMbDHtw3kW ByaP3wffMHssWfKTKYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugStj2ey3rAUt2hV7Pjxhb2A8Ld/FyMEhIWAi cf9fRBcjJ5ApJnHh3nq2LkYuDiGBk4wSf6bdYoZw1jBKbN60ixGkildAW+J3+wdmkGYWARWJ 2ys4QMJsAhYSW27dZwGxRQWiJLonPWKHKBeUODnzCVhcRCBI4t/G/ewgrcICZhIXf3uChIUE SiQeN7xiAQlzCoRK7OgShbhMXKKnMQikgllAT2LK1RZGCFteYvvbOcwQndoSy5+1sExgFJyF ZNcsJC2zkLQsYGRexShZnFqclJtuZKiXm55bopdalJlcXJyfp1ecuokRGK4Ht/w23ME48Zr9 IUZpDhYlcV6G6Z1BQgLpiSWp2ampBalF8UWlOanFhxiZODilGhibz7mK/pzjtJXVSuZNaaxG +ewC8TVRi4qyi3b6cdo3Jv/lMzrO0/mj82kZ32rNGUxXBM5+8zDaNZvn/4qF0uzzzadx75hZ WnFpz7UIn2uLo77qFXbvSRW+4862LdhcTE7j3tJTOauclh9eqDzp7maJuV7RbVXO+XdDLVxO VJUocn3+MP+I2GUlluKMREMt5qLiRAC0VyE7JQIAAA== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/knN-31N8juWSyT17WHEIPOaIIyk Subject: Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 10:25:30 -0000 Hi Tom, thanks for your comments. Authors, could you please look into this? Thanks, Gonzalo On 07/04/2014 12:08 AM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote: >> Hi, >> >> we WGLCed this draft some time ago, but we are WGLCing it again at this >> point to make sure people are happy with the current version: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis/ >> >> This WGLC will end on April 6th. Please, send your comments to this >> list before then. >> > > I read the revised version again today and believe it is ready to publish once the below nits are taken care of. I believe that they are mostly editorial but I'd be happy to discuss on the list. > > - Tom > > Section 1 > --------- > > Old text: > > There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity. > > New text: > > There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity (although there may be transient periods of time such as key replacement when more than one identifier may be active). > > The reference to Section 7 should be to Section 6. > > The first use of ESP should be cited (it is later cited in 6.1). > > Section 2 > --------- > > Old text: > > Public is | > | | a relative term here, ranging from known to peers | > | | only to known to the World. | > > New text: > > > Public is | > | | a relative term here, ranging from "known to | > | | peers only" to "known to the world." | > > Again, the reference to HIP base exchange should be Section 6, not Section 7 > > Section 3 > ----------- > > Old text: > > o The names should have a localized abstraction so that it can be > used in existing protocols and APIs. > > New text: > > o The names should have a localized abstraction so that they can be > used in existing protocols and APIs. > > Section 4 > --------- > > Old text: > > a public-key-based HI can > authenticate the HIP packets and protect them for man-in-the-middle > attacks. > > New text: > > a public-key-based HI can > authenticate the HIP packets and protect them from man-in-the-middle > attacks. > > s/HIP BEX/HIP base exchange > > Section 4.2 > ----------- > s/through out/throughout > > Section 4.3 > ----------- > s/HIts/HITs > > Section 4.5 > ----------- > s/types of application/types of applications > > Old text: > > For instance, > Light-weight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or in a Public Key > Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis]. > > New text: > > For instance, a directory based on the > Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or a Public Key > Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis] may be used. > > s/associate with/associated with > > s/a LDAP or DHT/an LDAP-based directory or DHT > > Section 5 > --------- > > Old text: > > As discussed above, the IP > addresses can be seen to be a confounding of routing direction > vectors and interface names. > > New text: > > As discussed above, the IP > addresses can be seen to be a confounding of computing platform > names and interface names. > > (or else delete this sentence as it is somewhat redundant with other sentences below; I just felt that the "confounding" aspect relates to EIDs and locators instead of routing direction vectors) > > Section 8 > --------- > s/cannot distinguished/cannot be distinguished > > Section 9 > --------- > s/intestigating/investigating > > s/Particularly, so called bloom filters/In particular, so-called Bloom filters > > (also in section 12.3, 'Bloom' is not capitalized; it should be either be capitalized everywhere (typical usage that I have seen) or lower case everywhere) > > s/datastructures/data structures > > s/by HIP working group/by the HIP working group > > Section 10 > ---------- > s/in a similar vain/similar to how > > Old text: > The implementations should provide for a policy of > initiator HIT to responder HIT. > > New text: > The implementations should provide for a policy mapping of > initiator HITs to responder HITs. > > Section 11 > ---------- > s/With the exception High-Performance/With the exception of High-Performance > > s/As majority of the/As the majority of the > > s/More agile IPv6 interoperability as discussed in Section 4.4./More agile IPv6 interoperability can be achieved, as discussed in Section 4.4. > > s/An addition, the underlying/Additionally, the underlying > > s/halves the size of access control lists/can potentially halve the size of access control lists > > the reference [scultz-intermittent] should probably be spelled [schuetz-intermittent] > > Section 11.3 > ------------ > s/accomodate/accommodate > > s/strictly speaking mandatory/mandatory > > Section 12.2 > ------------ > s/credit-based authorization approach Host Mobility/credit-based authorization approach for host mobility > > Section 12.3 > ------------- > s/There has been attempts/There have been attempts > > s/the protection of malign data flows/?? > > s/which the the end-hosts/which the end-hosts > > Section 15 > ---------- > s/RFC 4424/RFC 4423 > > From nobody Tue Apr 8 03:27:38 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90B541A01E9 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 03:27:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4zBuy2io_9mt for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 03:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cs.hut.fi (mail.cs.hut.fi [130.233.192.7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C40F1A02E0 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 03:27:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hutcs.cs.hut.fi [130.233.192.10]) by mail.cs.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF563080F5 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:27:21 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <5343CF09.9030205@cs.hut.fi> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:27:21 +0300 From: Miika Komu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hipsec@ietf.org References: <532AD28B.4010204@ericsson.com> <5343CE8D.3020506@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <5343CE8D.3020506@ericsson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/cUdyVaTv16GBSAtXIhwubxoKE6Y Subject: Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 10:27:35 -0000 Hi, sure thing, thanks Tom for comments! On 04/08/2014 01:25 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: > Hi Tom, > > thanks for your comments. Authors, could you please look into this? > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > > On 07/04/2014 12:08 AM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> we WGLCed this draft some time ago, but we are WGLCing it again at this >>> point to make sure people are happy with the current version: >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis/ >>> >>> This WGLC will end on April 6th. Please, send your comments to this >>> list before then. >>> >> >> I read the revised version again today and believe it is ready to publish once the below nits are taken care of. I believe that they are mostly editorial but I'd be happy to discuss on the list. >> >> - Tom >> >> Section 1 >> --------- >> >> Old text: >> >> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity. >> >> New text: >> >> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity (although there may be transient periods of time such as key replacement when more than one identifier may be active). >> >> The reference to Section 7 should be to Section 6. >> >> The first use of ESP should be cited (it is later cited in 6.1). >> >> Section 2 >> --------- >> >> Old text: >> >> Public is | >> | | a relative term here, ranging from known to peers | >> | | only to known to the World. | >> >> New text: >> >> >> Public is | >> | | a relative term here, ranging from "known to | >> | | peers only" to "known to the world." | >> >> Again, the reference to HIP base exchange should be Section 6, not Section 7 >> >> Section 3 >> ----------- >> >> Old text: >> >> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that it can be >> used in existing protocols and APIs. >> >> New text: >> >> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that they can be >> used in existing protocols and APIs. >> >> Section 4 >> --------- >> >> Old text: >> >> a public-key-based HI can >> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them for man-in-the-middle >> attacks. >> >> New text: >> >> a public-key-based HI can >> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them from man-in-the-middle >> attacks. >> >> s/HIP BEX/HIP base exchange >> >> Section 4.2 >> ----------- >> s/through out/throughout >> >> Section 4.3 >> ----------- >> s/HIts/HITs >> >> Section 4.5 >> ----------- >> s/types of application/types of applications >> >> Old text: >> >> For instance, >> Light-weight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or in a Public Key >> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis]. >> >> New text: >> >> For instance, a directory based on the >> Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or a Public Key >> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis] may be used. >> >> s/associate with/associated with >> >> s/a LDAP or DHT/an LDAP-based directory or DHT >> >> Section 5 >> --------- >> >> Old text: >> >> As discussed above, the IP >> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of routing direction >> vectors and interface names. >> >> New text: >> >> As discussed above, the IP >> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of computing platform >> names and interface names. >> >> (or else delete this sentence as it is somewhat redundant with other sentences below; I just felt that the "confounding" aspect relates to EIDs and locators instead of routing direction vectors) >> >> Section 8 >> --------- >> s/cannot distinguished/cannot be distinguished >> >> Section 9 >> --------- >> s/intestigating/investigating >> >> s/Particularly, so called bloom filters/In particular, so-called Bloom filters >> >> (also in section 12.3, 'Bloom' is not capitalized; it should be either be capitalized everywhere (typical usage that I have seen) or lower case everywhere) >> >> s/datastructures/data structures >> >> s/by HIP working group/by the HIP working group >> >> Section 10 >> ---------- >> s/in a similar vain/similar to how >> >> Old text: >> The implementations should provide for a policy of >> initiator HIT to responder HIT. >> >> New text: >> The implementations should provide for a policy mapping of >> initiator HITs to responder HITs. >> >> Section 11 >> ---------- >> s/With the exception High-Performance/With the exception of High-Performance >> >> s/As majority of the/As the majority of the >> >> s/More agile IPv6 interoperability as discussed in Section 4.4./More agile IPv6 interoperability can be achieved, as discussed in Section 4.4. >> >> s/An addition, the underlying/Additionally, the underlying >> >> s/halves the size of access control lists/can potentially halve the size of access control lists >> >> the reference [scultz-intermittent] should probably be spelled [schuetz-intermittent] >> >> Section 11.3 >> ------------ >> s/accomodate/accommodate >> >> s/strictly speaking mandatory/mandatory >> >> Section 12.2 >> ------------ >> s/credit-based authorization approach Host Mobility/credit-based authorization approach for host mobility >> >> Section 12.3 >> ------------- >> s/There has been attempts/There have been attempts >> >> s/the protection of malign data flows/?? >> >> s/which the the end-hosts/which the end-hosts >> >> Section 15 >> ---------- >> s/RFC 4424/RFC 4423 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec > From nobody Tue Apr 8 06:46:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23EC11A03D9 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 06:46:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.273 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.273 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o9JTAS855J2W for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 06:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8947E1A0330 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 06:46:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D29062A8C; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:46:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8xepO1vIXCi1; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 09:46:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (lx120e2.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CEA562A62; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 09:46:18 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <5343FDAA.3060404@htt-consult.com> Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:46:18 -0400 From: Robert Moskowitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Miika Komu , hipsec@ietf.org References: <532AD28B.4010204@ericsson.com> <5343CE8D.3020506@ericsson.com> <5343CF09.9030205@cs.hut.fi> In-Reply-To: <5343CF09.9030205@cs.hut.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/UJV-nMiufYpFbvtHMdA9P-42rPs Subject: Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:46:43 -0000 On 04/08/2014 06:27 AM, Miika Komu wrote: > Hi, > > sure thing, thanks Tom for comments! ONe pass through them and they all look ok. > > On 04/08/2014 01:25 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> thanks for your comments. Authors, could you please look into this? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> On 07/04/2014 12:08 AM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> we WGLCed this draft some time ago, but we are WGLCing it again at >>>> this >>>> point to make sure people are happy with the current version: >>>> >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis/ >>>> >>>> This WGLC will end on April 6th. Please, send your comments to this >>>> list before then. >>>> >>> >>> I read the revised version again today and believe it is ready to >>> publish once the below nits are taken care of. I believe that they >>> are mostly editorial but I'd be happy to discuss on the list. >>> >>> - Tom >>> >>> Section 1 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity >>> (although there may be transient periods of time such as key >>> replacement when more than one identifier may be active). >>> >>> The reference to Section 7 should be to Section 6. >>> >>> The first use of ESP should be cited (it is later cited in 6.1). >>> >>> Section 2 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> Public is | >>> | | a relative term here, ranging from known to peers | >>> | | only to known to the World. | >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> >>> Public is | >>> | | a relative term here, ranging from "known to | >>> | | peers only" to "known to the world." | >>> >>> Again, the reference to HIP base exchange should be Section 6, not >>> Section 7 >>> >>> Section 3 >>> ----------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that it can be >>> used in existing protocols and APIs. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that they can be >>> used in existing protocols and APIs. >>> >>> Section 4 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> a public-key-based HI can >>> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them for man-in-the-middle >>> attacks. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> a public-key-based HI can >>> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them from man-in-the-middle >>> attacks. >>> >>> s/HIP BEX/HIP base exchange >>> >>> Section 4.2 >>> ----------- >>> s/through out/throughout >>> >>> Section 4.3 >>> ----------- >>> s/HIts/HITs >>> >>> Section 4.5 >>> ----------- >>> s/types of application/types of applications >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> For instance, >>> Light-weight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or in a Public Key >>> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis]. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> For instance, a directory based on the >>> Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or a Public Key >>> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis] may be used. >>> >>> s/associate with/associated with >>> >>> s/a LDAP or DHT/an LDAP-based directory or DHT >>> >>> Section 5 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> As discussed above, the IP >>> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of routing direction >>> vectors and interface names. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> As discussed above, the IP >>> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of computing platform >>> names and interface names. >>> >>> (or else delete this sentence as it is somewhat redundant with other >>> sentences below; I just felt that the "confounding" aspect relates >>> to EIDs and locators instead of routing direction vectors) >>> >>> Section 8 >>> --------- >>> s/cannot distinguished/cannot be distinguished >>> >>> Section 9 >>> --------- >>> s/intestigating/investigating >>> >>> s/Particularly, so called bloom filters/In particular, so-called >>> Bloom filters >>> >>> (also in section 12.3, 'Bloom' is not capitalized; it should be >>> either be capitalized everywhere (typical usage that I have seen) or >>> lower case everywhere) >>> >>> s/datastructures/data structures >>> >>> s/by HIP working group/by the HIP working group >>> >>> Section 10 >>> ---------- >>> s/in a similar vain/similar to how >>> >>> Old text: >>> The implementations should provide for a policy of >>> initiator HIT to responder HIT. >>> >>> New text: >>> The implementations should provide for a policy mapping of >>> initiator HITs to responder HITs. >>> >>> Section 11 >>> ---------- >>> s/With the exception High-Performance/With the exception of >>> High-Performance >>> >>> s/As majority of the/As the majority of the >>> >>> s/More agile IPv6 interoperability as discussed in Section 4.4./More >>> agile IPv6 interoperability can be achieved, as discussed in Section >>> 4.4. >>> >>> s/An addition, the underlying/Additionally, the underlying >>> >>> s/halves the size of access control lists/can potentially halve the >>> size of access control lists >>> >>> the reference [scultz-intermittent] should probably be spelled >>> [schuetz-intermittent] >>> >>> Section 11.3 >>> ------------ >>> s/accomodate/accommodate >>> >>> s/strictly speaking mandatory/mandatory >>> >>> Section 12.2 >>> ------------ >>> s/credit-based authorization approach Host Mobility/credit-based >>> authorization approach for host mobility >>> >>> Section 12.3 >>> ------------- >>> s/There has been attempts/There have been attempts >>> >>> s/the protection of malign data flows/?? >>> >>> s/which the the end-hosts/which the end-hosts >>> >>> Section 15 >>> ---------- >>> s/RFC 4424/RFC 4423 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Hipsec mailing list >> Hipsec@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >> > > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec > From miika.komu@aalto.fi Mon Apr 14 02:19:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F5E21A028C for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 02:19:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.528 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S-ooVRcY55yD for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 02:19:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-out-01.aalto.fi (smtp-out-01.aalto.fi [130.233.228.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50E381A0106 for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 02:19:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-out-01.aalto.fi (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Email Security Appliance) with SMTP id 32D101152D9_34BA82EB; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 09:19:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from EXHUB02.org.aalto.fi (exhub02.org.aalto.fi [130.233.222.119]) by smtp-out-01.aalto.fi (Sophos Email Appliance) with ESMTP id 7E7EC1152CA_34BA82DF; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 09:19:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (130.233.192.10) by mail.aalto.fi (130.233.222.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.174.1; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:19:41 +0300 Message-ID: <534BA82C.80500@aalto.fi> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:19:40 +0300 From: Miika Komu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hip WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [130.233.192.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/Y-zUG3BaxV3jIVTKkRZcZsp1j6g X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 05:12:34 -0700 Cc: hipl-users@freelists.org, hipl-dev@freelists.org Subject: [Hipsec] HIP in a cloud testbed to analyze CERN data X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 09:22:01 -0000 FYI, HIP for Linux is now utilized in a testbed cloud deployment that is used for analyzing CMS (Compact Muon Solenoid) data from CERN. The HIP protocol provides secure connectivity and connection management capabilities for the OpenStack based cloud. Thanks to Salman Toor, Juhani Toivonen and Lirim Osmani. The work has been carried out in the Academy of Finland DII-HEP project led by professors Paula Eerola and Sasu Tarkoma. DII-HEP (CMS) cluster is running HIP: http://www.nordugrid.org/monitor/ From nobody Thu Apr 24 11:01:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5DB1A02BA for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:01:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.574 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.574 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eWHyCKrtsrxN for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:01:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from stl-mbsout-01.boeing.com (stl-mbsout-01.boeing.com [130.76.96.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1774A1A01DB for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by stl-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id s3OI1eXr016467; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 13:01:40 -0500 Received: from XCH-PHX-209.sw.nos.boeing.com (xch-phx-209.sw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.29]) by stl-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id s3OI1XMe016372 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Thu, 24 Apr 2014 13:01:34 -0500 Received: from XCH-BLV-105.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:82f7:1979::82f7:1979) by XCH-PHX-209.sw.nos.boeing.com (2002:82f7:191d::82f7:191d) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:01:32 -0700 Received: from XCH-BLV-104.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.169]) by XCH-BLV-105.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.5.26]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:01:32 -0700 From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: "'Gonzalo Camarillo'" , HIP Thread-Topic: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and 5202bis Thread-Index: AQHPRBdhwYEdXCWiX0urmltbKZulIZshRUDA Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:01:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532AA84C.2020705@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <532AA84C.2020705@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-MML: disable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/LaiI7qBQz8tEUpioK-MLP99Q8CM Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and 5202bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:01:49 -0000 Hi Gonzalo, these have been sitting in this state for over a month now, and= I haven't seen mention of them in the IESG telechat minutes. Can you let = us know what you think should be happening next, and by when? Thanks, Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: Hipsec [mailto:hipsec-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gonzalo > Camarillo > Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 1:35 AM > To: HIP > Subject: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and > 5202bis >=20 > Folks, >=20 > FYI: I have just requested the publication of 4843bis, 5201bis, and > 5202bis: >=20 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/hip/ >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > Gonzalo >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From nobody Thu Apr 24 11:07:05 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99C151A0386 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:07:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.172 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5aTk8_ycorXj for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:07:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BDE11A0383 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:07:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B263C1B8087 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:06:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9091119005C; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:06:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:06:56 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:06:51 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <3877EA31-1E8A-4C8B-BD3F-601E450F1804@nominum.com> References: <532AA84C.2020705@ericsson.com> To: "Henderson, Thomas R" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/snNBwhsyhn4x_tagGpaEzlxJObw Cc: HIP Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and 5202bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:07:04 -0000 On Apr 24, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Henderson, Thomas R = wrote: > Hi Gonzalo, these have been sitting in this state for over a month = now, and I haven't seen mention of them in the IESG telechat minutes. = Can you let us know what you think should be happening next, and by = when? I'm still working on digesting the main HIPv2 document so that I can = send it to last call. Nothing dire=97I'm just distracted by other = work. If you'd prefer, I can last call it now and address any AD = comments during the last call period, but that will put pressure on you = for a quick turnaround of any comments. From nobody Thu Apr 24 11:11:20 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C311E1A0386 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:11:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.473 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.473 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BlPRwlbKkc0Q for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:11:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slb-mbsout-01.boeing.com (slb-mbsout-01.boeing.com [130.76.64.128]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC111A03C7 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:11:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by slb-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id s3OIB9M0024183; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:11:09 -0700 Received: from XCH-PHX-412.sw.nos.boeing.com (xch-phx-412.sw.nos.boeing.com [10.57.37.44]) by slb-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id s3OIB3DH024086 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:11:04 -0700 Received: from XCH-BLV-104.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.169]) by XCH-PHX-412.sw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.12.47]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:11:03 -0700 From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: "'Ted Lemon'" Thread-Topic: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and 5202bis Thread-Index: AQHPRBdhwYEdXCWiX0urmltbKZulIZshRUDAgAB32ID//4tpQA== Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:11:03 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532AA84C.2020705@ericsson.com> <3877EA31-1E8A-4C8B-BD3F-601E450F1804@nominum.com> In-Reply-To: <3877EA31-1E8A-4C8B-BD3F-601E450F1804@nominum.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-MML: disable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/9GEOe8h6HAzLzXAsop3qsA9ix5U Cc: HIP Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and 5202bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:11:19 -0000 I'm fine with what you have been planning to do; I just wanted to make sure= it hadn't fallen through the cracks since the datatracker is listing them = with a red status. Thanks, Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: Ted Lemon [mailto:ted.lemon@nominum.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 11:07 AM > To: Henderson, Thomas R > Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo; HIP > Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and > 5202bis >=20 > On Apr 24, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Henderson, Thomas R > wrote: > > Hi Gonzalo, these have been sitting in this state for over a month > now, and I haven't seen mention of them in the IESG telechat minutes. > Can you let us know what you think should be happening next, and by > when? >=20 > I'm still working on digesting the main HIPv2 document so that I can > send it to last call. Nothing dire-I'm just distracted by other work. > If you'd prefer, I can last call it now and address any AD comments > during the last call period, but that will put pressure on you for a > quick turnaround of any comments. From nobody Thu Apr 24 11:22:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B8991A0318 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:22:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.172 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x67FwZnaEytU for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:22:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 497CF1A02BA for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:22:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6491F1B8067 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:22:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB6519005C; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:22:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:22:03 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:21:57 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <532AA84C.2020705@ericsson.com> <3877EA31-1E8A-4C8B-BD3F-601E450F1804@nominum.com> To: "Henderson, Thomas R" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/lt7hR3Zp_Nnm2h0fzQQst1ep15U Cc: HIP Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and 5202bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:22:11 -0000 On Apr 24, 2014, at 2:11 PM, Henderson, Thomas R = wrote: > I'm fine with what you have been planning to do; I just wanted to make = sure it hadn't fallen through the cracks since the datatracker is = listing them with a red status. Nope. It just does that to make me feel guilty (or, alternatively, to = make me change the status to AD review, which I always forget to do). From nobody Thu Apr 24 11:25:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37C381A0330 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:25:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.172 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wY2Ubv4cmKsv for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E1741A02BA for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D857163546; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:25:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a8m3QCq3PPJw; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:25:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (lx120e2.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 405E163556; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:25:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <5359570F.5020806@htt-consult.com> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:25:19 -0400 From: Robert Moskowitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Henderson, Thomas R" , 'Ted Lemon' References: <532AA84C.2020705@ericsson.com> <3877EA31-1E8A-4C8B-BD3F-601E450F1804@nominum.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/jIkuHlOtZUtPxUPfnAWv3NxUtOQ Cc: HIP Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and 5202bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:25:48 -0000 Ditto. On 04/24/2014 02:11 PM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote: > I'm fine with what you have been planning to do; I just wanted to make sure it hadn't fallen through the cracks since the datatracker is listing them with a red status. > > Thanks, > Tom > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ted Lemon [mailto:ted.lemon@nominum.com] >> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 11:07 AM >> To: Henderson, Thomas R >> Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo; HIP >> Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Publication requested for 4843bis, 5201bis, and >> 5202bis >> >> On Apr 24, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Henderson, Thomas R >> wrote: >>> Hi Gonzalo, these have been sitting in this state for over a month >> now, and I haven't seen mention of them in the IESG telechat minutes. >> Can you let us know what you think should be happening next, and by >> when? >> >> I'm still working on digesting the main HIPv2 document so that I can >> send it to last call. Nothing dire-I'm just distracted by other work. >> If you'd prefer, I can last call it now and address any AD comments >> during the last call period, but that will put pressure on you for a >> quick turnaround of any comments. > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec > From nobody Thu Apr 24 12:13:28 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 341121A03C7; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:13:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4knGeSL12jpT; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:13:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78F7F1A038E; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:13:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.4.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20140424191322.25357.96979.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:13:22 -0700 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/4THUsCKwV6AGjTb4PPP8D4zprv4 Cc: hipsec@ietf.org Subject: [Hipsec] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-08.txt X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 19:13:24 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Host Identity Protocol Working Group of the IETF. Title : Host Identity Protocol Architecture Authors : Robert Moskowitz Miika Komu Filename : draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-08.txt Pages : 39 Date : 2014-04-24 Abstract: This memo describes a new namespace, the Host Identity namespace, and a new protocol layer, the Host Identity Protocol, between the internetworking and transport layers. Herein are presented the basics of the current namespaces, their strengths and weaknesses, and how a new namespace will add completeness to them. The roles of this new namespace in the protocols are defined. This document obsoletes RFC 4423 and addresses the concerns raised by the IESG, particularly that of crypto agility. It incorporates lessons learned from the implementations of RFC 5201 and goes further to explain how HIP works as a secure signaling channel. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis/ There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-08 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-08 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Thu Apr 24 12:15:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3D001A0381 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.472 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.472 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hkZVAfT0RVHb for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:15:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cs.hut.fi (mail.cs.hut.fi [130.233.192.7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D93591A036B for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 12:15:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hutcs.cs.hut.fi [130.233.192.10]) by mail.cs.hut.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 332EF3088FF for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 22:15:03 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <535962B7.3080409@cs.hut.fi> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 22:15:03 +0300 From: Miika Komu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hipsec@ietf.org References: <532AD28B.4010204@ericsson.com> <5343CE8D.3020506@ericsson.com> <5343CF09.9030205@cs.hut.fi> In-Reply-To: <5343CF09.9030205@cs.hut.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/g-4zvIiG0nSMhg-e1p0P_JnW6B8 Subject: Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 19:15:16 -0000 Hi, Tom: thanks again for good catches! All comments are fixed in 08 version. Gonzalo: I think we're good to go for the last call. On 04/08/2014 01:27 PM, Miika Komu wrote: > Hi, > > sure thing, thanks Tom for comments! > > On 04/08/2014 01:25 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> thanks for your comments. Authors, could you please look into this? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> On 07/04/2014 12:08 AM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> we WGLCed this draft some time ago, but we are WGLCing it again at this >>>> point to make sure people are happy with the current version: >>>> >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis/ >>>> >>>> This WGLC will end on April 6th. Please, send your comments to this >>>> list before then. >>>> >>> >>> I read the revised version again today and believe it is ready to >>> publish once the below nits are taken care of. I believe that they >>> are mostly editorial but I'd be happy to discuss on the list. >>> >>> - Tom >>> >>> Section 1 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity >>> (although there may be transient periods of time such as key >>> replacement when more than one identifier may be active). >>> >>> The reference to Section 7 should be to Section 6. >>> >>> The first use of ESP should be cited (it is later cited in 6.1). >>> >>> Section 2 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> Public >>> is | >>> | | a relative term here, ranging from known to >>> peers | >>> | | only to known to the >>> World. | >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> >>> Public >>> is | >>> | | a relative term here, ranging from "known >>> to | >>> | | peers only" to "known to the >>> world." | >>> >>> Again, the reference to HIP base exchange should be Section 6, not >>> Section 7 >>> >>> Section 3 >>> ----------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that it can be >>> used in existing protocols and APIs. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that they can be >>> used in existing protocols and APIs. >>> >>> Section 4 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> a public-key-based HI can >>> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them for man-in-the-middle >>> attacks. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> a public-key-based HI can >>> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them from man-in-the-middle >>> attacks. >>> >>> s/HIP BEX/HIP base exchange >>> >>> Section 4.2 >>> ----------- >>> s/through out/throughout >>> >>> Section 4.3 >>> ----------- >>> s/HIts/HITs >>> >>> Section 4.5 >>> ----------- >>> s/types of application/types of applications >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> For instance, >>> Light-weight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or in a Public Key >>> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis]. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> For instance, a directory based on the >>> Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or a Public Key >>> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis] may be used. >>> >>> s/associate with/associated with >>> >>> s/a LDAP or DHT/an LDAP-based directory or DHT >>> >>> Section 5 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> As discussed above, the IP >>> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of routing direction >>> vectors and interface names. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> As discussed above, the IP >>> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of computing platform >>> names and interface names. >>> >>> (or else delete this sentence as it is somewhat redundant with other >>> sentences below; I just felt that the "confounding" aspect relates to >>> EIDs and locators instead of routing direction vectors) >>> >>> Section 8 >>> --------- >>> s/cannot distinguished/cannot be distinguished >>> >>> Section 9 >>> --------- >>> s/intestigating/investigating >>> >>> s/Particularly, so called bloom filters/In particular, so-called >>> Bloom filters >>> >>> (also in section 12.3, 'Bloom' is not capitalized; it should be >>> either be capitalized everywhere (typical usage that I have seen) or >>> lower case everywhere) >>> >>> s/datastructures/data structures >>> >>> s/by HIP working group/by the HIP working group >>> >>> Section 10 >>> ---------- >>> s/in a similar vain/similar to how >>> >>> Old text: >>> The implementations should provide for a policy of >>> initiator HIT to responder HIT. >>> >>> New text: >>> The implementations should provide for a policy mapping of >>> initiator HITs to responder HITs. >>> >>> Section 11 >>> ---------- >>> s/With the exception High-Performance/With the exception of >>> High-Performance >>> >>> s/As majority of the/As the majority of the >>> >>> s/More agile IPv6 interoperability as discussed in Section 4.4./More >>> agile IPv6 interoperability can be achieved, as discussed in Section >>> 4.4. >>> >>> s/An addition, the underlying/Additionally, the underlying >>> >>> s/halves the size of access control lists/can potentially halve the >>> size of access control lists >>> >>> the reference [scultz-intermittent] should probably be spelled >>> [schuetz-intermittent] >>> >>> Section 11.3 >>> ------------ >>> s/accomodate/accommodate >>> >>> s/strictly speaking mandatory/mandatory >>> >>> Section 12.2 >>> ------------ >>> s/credit-based authorization approach Host Mobility/credit-based >>> authorization approach for host mobility >>> >>> Section 12.3 >>> ------------- >>> s/There has been attempts/There have been attempts >>> >>> s/the protection of malign data flows/?? >>> >>> s/which the the end-hosts/which the end-hosts >>> >>> Section 15 >>> ---------- >>> s/RFC 4424/RFC 4423 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Hipsec mailing list >> Hipsec@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >> > > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec > From nobody Wed Apr 30 11:19:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDF0F1A887C for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:19:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.652 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VIVWWCCJyC6z for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4C2E1A8867 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916A463458 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:19:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2t5fKdjxaDUK for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:18:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (lx120e2.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E39162B94 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:18:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <53613E91.7010808@htt-consult.com> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:18:57 -0400 From: Robert Moskowitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hipsec@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/iQx6WCF_m9364yQi24otkAtDWIA Subject: [Hipsec] Unsticking HIP from 1st gear X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:19:14 -0000 Automotive analogy because right now I have been dragged back to my automotive history to work on the "Connected Car" security... I am working on multiple HIP projects. Real vendors with real products for real customers. In some cases things are separate, but in some there will be function overlap. I am working on HIP at multiple layers: MAC layer: 802.15.9 directly passing the HIP datagrams and keying the 802.15.4 security association. EAP-HIP for running over 802.1X and PANA. Yoshi has said he is willing in writing the draft. Networking layer: Besides 5202-bis BEET mode for EAP, there are more calls for Tunnel mode. Transport layer: Alternative keying for things like DTLS-PSK or SRTP. Messaging/Session layer: Besides my work on SSE (Session Layer Security) there are a couple other messaging environments that may create their own security framework, but I am pushing SSE where I can. Authentication only: HIP for authentication within someother framework. This is still rather vague and may end up elsewhere above. Anyway, HIP becomes an independed Key Management Protocol, needing a well defined API (we did something like this at one point?) where there can be many HIs for the different uses. Though I can't give information on individual projects, "No Wine Before its Time", there are some real projects in coding now and more at various levels of discussion. For those of you that have HIP web pages that are two years out of date, PLEASE get them current. It is embarrassing to be on a call with a consortium (last friday) to have one person saying, "I just checked out the site for the X code base and it has not been updated for two years." Please fix this. Anyone with a bit of time ( :) ) over the next week to help me flesh out HIP as a security service and review the API RFC, please contact me. I still can't spill too many beans, but more will be leaking out in the coming months.... And I really hope we can get RFCs published by July. Meanwhile I also have to finish up HIP DEX. Remaining stuff, I think, is only explanatory. I believe Rene set me straight and we got it pretty much nailed down in the latest draft. Though there is the question if SLIMFIT should go into the DEX draft or be a separate document. SLIMFIT with a bit more tweaking will fit into SMS packets without need of the SMS header... Thank you for your time and efforts. From nobody Wed Apr 30 12:47:33 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 275831A0972 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:47:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yH2xk4CCrgtf for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:47:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2298B1A095F for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:47:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE26D6346F for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 19:47:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TaPZsD3Q5ZVQ for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:47:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (lx120e2.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC7C262AD5 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:47:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <53615343.8070509@htt-consult.com> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:47:15 -0400 From: Robert Moskowitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hipsec@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/XHQnBU9UYV8F7s2Mbm9jVEo6nhw Subject: [Hipsec] iEEE 802.15.9 document review X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 19:47:31 -0000 I need review of the HIP portion of the 802.15.9 document. Since this is a 'private' p802 document I cannot make it publicly available. As the 802.15.9 chair I can designate outside reviewers; like a couple, not a couple hundred. Plus the HIP content needs work. Best helper is someone(s) that understand the security component of 802.15.4. thanks for the help. From nobody Wed Apr 30 12:52:38 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A99F41A0973 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:52:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.151 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.151 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zy31ONjgkuak for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.xplot.org (www.xplot.org [66.92.66.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48BCA1A099B for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shep (helo=alva.home) by www.xplot.org with local-esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1WfaY2-0006m6-00; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:52:06 -0400 From: Tim Shepard To: Robert Moskowitz In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:47:15 -0400. <53615343.8070509@htt-consult.com> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:52:06 -0400 Message-Id: Sender: Tim Shepard Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/W3-EZHp45RWG4ZEr5mcuWfVz278 Cc: hipsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Hipsec] iEEE 802.15.9 document review X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 19:52:28 -0000 > I need review of the HIP portion of the 802.15.9 document. Since this > is a 'private' p802 document I cannot make it publicly available. As > the 802.15.9 chair I can designate outside reviewers; like a couple, not > a couple hundred. Why does the document need to remain private? -Tim Shepard shep@alum.mit.edu From nobody Wed Apr 30 14:28:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ACE71A0948 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:28:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XH4Kb3BOfKb5 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:28:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1971A0958 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:28:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68F5362AD5; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:28:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W8IwHM7SsaMa; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:28:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (lx120e2.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1571362AD4; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:28:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <53616AE7.8010806@htt-consult.com> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:28:07 -0400 From: Robert Moskowitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tim Shepard References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/FBfKPSbcNX_LRVFrHw6YZNImAIw Cc: hipsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Hipsec] iEEE 802.15.9 document review X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:28:28 -0000 On 04/30/2014 03:52 PM, Tim Shepard wrote: >> I need review of the HIP portion of the 802.15.9 document. Since this >> is a 'private' p802 document I cannot make it publicly available. As >> the 802.15.9 chair I can designate outside reviewers; like a couple, not >> a couple hundred. > Why does the document need to remain private? Once you prepare an officially formatted IEEE standards document, it is restricted to distribution. I don't claim to know all the details, but if you want a group's working documents, you pretty much have to show up at a meeting. If you can find out about the meeting! IEEE 802.1 is something of a different bird and has managed to work around the rules in terms of making draft standards available. Part of this is their liason relationship in many areas of the IETF. I can't so easily claim that for 802.15.9 as it is about KMP TRANSPORT. Not KMP construction. But there are sections about how various KMPs interact with various 15.9 (and 15.4) stuff. I am working on getting a larger review, but have not gotten approval. Yet. But I can have a few others join the party....