Subject: [Roll] Security Framework moving to WG document

From: JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 09:55:26 -0700

Dear WG,

The security framework has been presented several times and reach a  
point where it was time to poll the WG for WG adoption.
There was a really good consensus to make it a WG document but as  
usual let's confirm on the mailing list.
Should you be opposed to make it a WG please voice your opinion on the  
list before March 30.

Thanks.

JP.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 15:44:53 -0500

Yes,

I think Kris and Txeta have done
a nice job defining the security model.  I am a bit concerned, from
what I noted at yesterday's meeting that this policy will only be applied
to RPL messages (i.e., DIO, DAO and DIS).  Kris didn't discuss the
security policy for the LLN/RPL data packets.  Maybe I just missed
it.  Hopefully the plan is to use the same policy across different
layers.  Otherwise the poor little sensors will be pummelled with
processing work.

Jerry

From:

JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>

To:

ROLL WG <[email-masked]>

Date:

03/23/2010 12:00 PM

Subject:

[Roll] Security Framework moving to
WG document

Dear WG,

list before March 30.

Thanks.

JP.

_______________________________________________

Roll mailing list

[email-masked]

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

---

From: Kris Pister <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:54:09 -0700

Jerry - the direction given was that we should focus exclusively on 
protecting the routing information.  I think that this is the right 
(first) thing to do, and I'm pretty sure we'd need to recharter to do 
more than that anyway.
I agree with you that we need to protect the data packets as well, but I 
think that needs to be either at L2, or end-to-end at transport or 
application, or preferably both.  Hopefully security is within scope for 
the CoRE charter.

ksjp

[email-masked] wrote:
>
> Yes,
>
>  I think Kris and Txeta have done a nice job defining the security 
> model.  I am a bit concerned, from what I noted at yesterday's meeting 
> that this policy will only be applied to RPL messages (i.e., DIO, DAO 
> and DIS).  Kris didn't discuss the security policy for the LLN/RPL 
> data packets.  Maybe I just missed it.  Hopefully the plan is to use 
> the same policy across different layers.  Otherwise the poor little 
> sensors will be pummelled with processing work.
>
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
>
> From: 	JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>
> To: 	ROLL WG <[email-masked]>
> Date: 	03/23/2010 12:00 PM
> Subject: 	[Roll] Security Framework moving to WG document
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Dear WG,
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>