From Pascal.Urien@enst.fr Fri Feb 6 05:53:42 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E559C3A6BC0 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:53:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yGV4XbQZpQC3 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:53:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp2.enst.fr (revol2.enst.fr [IPv6:2001:660:330f:2::e]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 185053A6A6A for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:53:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.enst.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8FFEB81B7 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 14:53:42 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at enst.fr Received: from PC-de-pascal.enst.fr (pptp21-118.enst.fr [137.194.21.118]) by smtp2.enst.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1FFFB819E for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 14:53:41 +0100 (CET) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 14:51:43 +0100 To: hipsec@ietf.org From: Pascal Urien Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Message-Id: <20090206135341.E1FFFB819E@smtp2.enst.fr> Subject: [Hipsec] HIP Tags X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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, 06 Feb 2009 13:53:43 -0000 Dear All, In the draft http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-urien-hip-tag-01.txt we propose a new framework for RFIDs enforcing users' privacy. The keys points are the following, - HIT is a random value and not the fixed hash of a public key - The tag number (EPC code) is the solution of a negotiated equation There are many issues dealing with technology feasibility and architecture design (HIP readers, portals, ...) I believe this new paradigm could be an interesting work for the working group. Is there anyone interested for supporting and participating to this work ? Best Regards Pascal From thomas.r.henderson@boeing.com Sat Feb 14 20:20:48 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E373A68A8 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nAvGuArmlkl8 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.64.48]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9E83A688D for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by slb-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/8.14.0/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id n1F4Kif4008216 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id n1F4KiLR017107 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwbh-11.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.55.84]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.0/8.14.0/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id n1F4Ki7p017104 for ; Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.55.44]) by XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:44 -0800 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:20:43 -0800 Message-ID: <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D07B0BDE9@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: meeting slot for IETF-74 Thread-Index: AcmPJMShsbAMEHSERA+xHc/3qL3eSg== From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Feb 2009 04:20:44.0531 (UTC) FILETIME=[C51BFC30:01C98F24] Subject: [Hipsec] meeting slot for IETF-74 X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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, 15 Feb 2009 04:20:48 -0000 Hi, I thought that the HIP WG had planned to meet in San Francisco. Have those plans changed? I don't see a slot on the agenda: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/74/agenda.html - Tom From gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com Sat Feb 21 00:53:17 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414163A682C for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:53:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.249 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UpgkKyK8e8Py for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:53:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (mailgw4.ericsson.se [193.180.251.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1FE3A68A4 for ; Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:53:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailgw4.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id B7DBF206B0; Sat, 21 Feb 2009 09:53:30 +0100 (CET) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3e-ac8bcbb000001315-26-499fc107e13b Received: from esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw4.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 2C4BD20551; Sat, 21 Feb 2009 09:53:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.177]) by esealmw127.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 21 Feb 2009 09:53:26 +0100 Received: from [164.48.166.41] ([164.48.166.41]) by esealmw129.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 21 Feb 2009 09:53:26 +0100 Message-ID: <499FC0FC.3050700@ericsson.com> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 10:53:16 +0200 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Henderson, Thomas R" References: <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D07B0BDE9@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com> In-Reply-To: <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D07B0BDE9@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Feb 2009 08:53:26.0481 (UTC) FILETIME=[DC11EC10:01C99401] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Cc: hipsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Hipsec] meeting slot for IETF-74 X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 08:53:17 -0000 Hi Tom, yes, the plans changed due to the very low level of activity. I hope we can regain the lost momentum soon. In any case, if you want, we can organize a small ad-hoc meeting to talk about any particular issue you have in mind. Cheers, Gonzalo Henderson, Thomas R wrote: > Hi, > I thought that the HIP WG had planned to meet in San Francisco. Have > those plans changed? I don't see a slot on the agenda: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/74/agenda.html > > - Tom > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec > From zhangdong_rh@huaweisymantec.com Tue Feb 24 19:15:22 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652483A680A for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:15:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.711 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.711 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.896, BAYES_40=-0.185] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7H-+nUHVL-2r for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:15:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mta1.huaweisymantec.com (mta1.huaweisymantec.com [121.15.168.142]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A0B03A67DD for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:15:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-disposition: inline Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Received: from hstml02-in.huaweisymantec.com ([172.26.3.41]) by hstga01-in.huaweisymantec.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-5.02 (built Oct 12 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0KFL006CCQDZJ520@hstga01-in.huaweisymantec.com> for hipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:15:35 +0800 (CST) Received: from huaweisymantec.com ([127.0.0.1]) by hstml02-in.huaweisymantec.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-5.02 (built Oct 12 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0KFL0063AQDXKI00@hstml02-in.huaweisymantec.com> for hipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:15:35 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.27.140.94] by hstml02-in.huaweisymantec.com (mshttpd); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:15:33 +0800 From: ZhangDong To: hipsec@ietf.org Message-id: Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:15:33 +0800 X-Mailer: Sun Java(tm) System Messenger Express 6.3-5.02 (built Oct 12 2007; 32bit) Content-language: zh-CN X-Accept-Language: zh-CN Priority: normal Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Gonzalo Camarillo Subject: [Hipsec] Questions in RFC5201 X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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, 25 Feb 2009 03:15:22 -0000 Dear All=2C = In these days=2C I have been studying about HIP=2E Here i consult you = something that i am not quite clear in RFC5201=2E In chapter 5=2E1=2C it is said that the HIP header is logically an IPv6 = = extension header=2E What do you mean about =22logically an IPv6 = extension header=22=3F HIP header is designed as a extension header of = IPv6=3F It is putted after the IP header and before transport layer = header=3F It is handled by the protocol stack in the implement=3F Is my understanding right=3F If what i say above are true=2C because the IP layer is stateless=2C the= = state and timeout retransmission should be maintained by the HIP = state machine=2E Right=3F Is the HIP state machine handled by the = application layer=3F Or by the IP layer=3F These are my questions=2E Maybe i miss something important in RFC5201=2E= Thank you very much=2E Best regards=2E Dong Zhang Huawei Symantec Technologies Co=2E=2C Ltd TEL=EF=BC=9A86-10-82829263 FAX=EF=BC=9A86-10-82829260 ADDRESS=EF=BC=9AHarbour Networks P=26D Center=2E Building 17=2C ZhongGua= nCun Software Park=2C No=2E8=2C Dongbeiwang West Road=2C HaiDian Distric= t=2C Beijing=2C China=2E From miika.komu@hiit.fi Wed Feb 25 04:08:11 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FEE03A67AD for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:08:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eIFT8iC0cvSY for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:08:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from creon.otaverkko.fi (creon.otaverkko.fi [212.68.0.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BB053A6997 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:08:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by creon.otaverkko.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572EE21AF3F; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:08:19 +0200 (EET) Received: from creon.otaverkko.fi ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (creon.otaverkko.fi [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14148-06; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:08:14 +0200 (EET) Received: from argo.otaverkko.fi (argo.otaverkko.fi [212.68.0.2]) by creon.otaverkko.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id C37A221AF3B; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:08:14 +0200 (EET) Received: from [193.167.187.26] (halko.pc.infrahip.net [193.167.187.26]) by argo.otaverkko.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4D825ED06; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:08:14 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <49A534AE.3020101@hiit.fi> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:08:14 +0200 From: Miika Komu User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ZhangDong References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at otaverkko.fi Cc: hipsec@ietf.org, Gonzalo Camarillo Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Questions in RFC5201 X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: miika.komu@hiit.fi 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, 25 Feb 2009 12:08:11 -0000 ZhangDong wrote: Dear Zhang, > Dear All, > > In these days, I have been studying about HIP. Here i consult you > something that i am not quite clear in RFC5201. > > In chapter 5.1, it is said that the HIP header is logically an IPv6 > extension header. What do you mean about "logically an IPv6 > extension header"? HIP header is designed as a extension header of > IPv6? It means that HIP control header has the same "next header" and "header length" fields as in IPv6 extension headers. Nothing prevents sending of HIP control packets over IPv4. > It is putted after the IP header and before transport layer > header? Usually, there is no transport layer header after HIP control, just IP(HIP). The hiccups draft makes an exception to this. > It is handled by the protocol stack in the implement? Usually HIP control plane is handled by userspace software. Usually the data plane (ESP) is handled by the stack. > If what i say above are true, because the IP layer is stateless, the > state and timeout retransmission should be maintained by the HIP > state machine. Right? Is the HIP state machine handled by the > application layer? Or by the IP layer? The HIP state machine and HIP control plane retransmissions are usually handled by a separate software (daemon) running on the system. From heer@informatik.rwth-aachen.de Sat Feb 28 11:10:29 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675613A6943 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 11:10:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.801 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id APX-rHEVhqkx for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 11:10:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mta-1.ms.rz.rwth-aachen.de (mta-1.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [134.130.7.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EC083A6869 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 11:10:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Received: from ironport-out-1.rz.rwth-aachen.de ([134.130.5.40]) by mta-1.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.de (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008)) with ESMTP id <0KFS008Y7IM12P40@mta-1.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.de> for hipsec@ietf.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:10:50 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,282,1233529200"; d="scan'208";a="3239667" Received: from zelos.rz.rwth-aachen.de (HELO relay-auth.rwth-aachen.de) ([134.130.3.23]) by ironport-in-1.rz.rwth-aachen.de with ESMTP; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:10:50 +0100 Received: from [192.168.3.237] (13.189-66-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be [87.66.189.13]) (authenticated bits=0) by relay-auth.rwth-aachen.de (8.13.8/8.13.1/1) with ESMTP id n1SJAmkr012018 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:10:49 +0100 Message-id: <4DF1C64C-44B9-4163-ACEA-F42227F39619@cs.rwth-aachen.de> From: Tobias Heer To: hip WG , hipsec-rg@listserv.cybertrust.com Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 20:10:49 +0100 References: <49A7D89F.8080204@hiit.fi> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Subject: [Hipsec] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-heer-hip-service-00 X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 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: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:10:29 -0000 > Hi folks, There is a new Internet draft concerning services offered by HIP end- hosts and HIP middleboxes. It allows to specify services in a flexible and fine-grained manner. Feedback is very appreciated. We are especially interested in service classifications that are of interest to you. Best regards, Tobias > > A new version of I-D, draft-heer-hip-service-00.txt has been > successfuly submitted by Samu Varjonen and posted to the IETF > repository. > > Filename: draft-heer-hip-service > Revision: 00 > Title: Service Identifiers for HIP > Creation_date: 2009-02-27 > WG ID: Independent Submission > Number_of_pages: 10 > > Abstract: > The Host Identity Protocol [RFC5201] is a signaling protocol for > secure communication, mobility, and multihoming that introduces a > cryptographic namespace. This document specifies an extension for > HIP that enables HIP end-hosts and HIP-aware middleboxes to announce > services to HIP hosts during a HIP Base EXchange (BEX) or HIP update. > Service providers are able to specify the type and requirements of a > service; clients can then decide to agree on the terms of service. > This allows the service provider to verify the accordance of the > client with the service conditions while the client is able to verify > the authenticity of the used service. > > > > The IETF Secretariat. > > > > -- Dipl.-Inform. Tobias Heer, Ph.D. Student Distributed Systems Group RWTH Aachen University, Germany tel: +49 241 80 207 76 web: http://ds.cs.rwth-aachen.de/members/heer