Subject: Re: [lisp] Using Signed object to validate entries in Mapping Database: draft-lisp-rgaglian-ioa-00.txt

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:28:40 -0400 (EDT)

> From: Olivier Bonaventure <[email-masked]>

    > If we delay discussions about security problems, I guess that they will
    > come back later and that we'll have lots of difficulty solving them.

I agree we should make certain that LISP is _securable_, even if we don't
actually deploy that securitization at this point. However, I wonder if such
work would conflict with the limited WG charter? Although I suppose it could
always be peformed as a non-WG activity.

Another issue would be if there is some question about the performance
impact, one which could only really be answered to everyone's satisfaction
with actual emperical data (much as some people are concerned with mapping
lookup delays, caching mappings, etc); we might have to do some deployment
to fully answer that.

	Noel

---

From: Olivier Bonaventure <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 10:58:40 +0100

Noel,

> always be peformed as a non-WG activity.

I don't think that the securisation problem will be part of the (first)
charter, but I hope that there will be technical discussions concerning
this problem and that security will be included the next time the WG
will revise its charter.

> lookup delays, caching mappings, etc); we might have to do some deployment

We should encourage experimentation with different mapping systems to
see the impact of securing these mappings. I hope that some researchers
will be able to start from Luigi's implementation and perform useful
experiments.

Olivier

-- 
http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be , UCLouvain, Belgium