[6tisch] FW: [6lo] WG adoption call for draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd-04

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Thu, 29 September 2016 09:59 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C86D812B3E1 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 02:59:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.836
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.836 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.316, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 zbz1EVnU_6B0 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 02:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0237112B3CA for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 02:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12928; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1475143142; x=1476352742; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=MjpOaiAhtfK1rG9xVWRJtSFYGBfPMhXMKON6swUJ/Og=; b=mmNhAhsvbXfOrBe1ZAmHjXF3/05ziJ75AzBFdT+9K6EnjwBhIVBYof/2 3U5Xkk/3/Gtq2aEth152nXeX8ribzCTf5LYgVSevsoZ9KNv0Qz6lLwTF4 GAEUlBzpGEjS56NACtvp8iVLPG6gFv44V2GJXf4ewpoxIx17FMUhSCqi8 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CBAQDR5OxX/5JdJa1TChoBAQEBAgEBAQEIAQEBAYMJNgEBAQEBHld8B40rln2DDYwEhRKCBiSFegKBXzgUAQIBAQEBAQEBXieEYQEBAQMBHRBBEAsCAQgRBAEBKAcyFAcBAQUDAQEEEwgMiDEIDrxBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFwWGN4RVhBwOUIUoBYYaiBuLQgGGJoYGgzyBdYRmiRqMbIN8AR42hQlyAYVOJQaBAoEAAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,414,1470700800"; d="scan'208,217";a="329422514"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Sep 2016 09:59:01 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (xch-rcd-005.cisco.com [173.37.102.15]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u8T9x0oj024827 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:59:00 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 04:59:00 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 04:59:00 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "'6tisch@ietf.org'" <6tisch@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [6lo] WG adoption call for draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd-04
Thread-Index: AdIYWoMhUsaXqbcHSTyhqFpPI3ba9wB3JAOQ
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:58:15 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:58:13 +0000
Message-ID: <b549716bd1f743c5a461e87ca6745f87@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <05f801d2185c$80697b20$813c7160$@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <05f801d2185c$80697b20$813c7160$@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.228.216.17]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_b549716bd1f743c5a461e87ca6745f87XCHRCD001ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/KKLYpbeVWLxYBMUIrszMv7me0o0>
Subject: [6tisch] FW: [6lo] WG adoption call for draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd-04
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tisch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6tisch/>
List-Post: <mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:59:05 -0000

Dear 6TiSCH community :

I wish to attract your attention (as an author) to this call that is happening at 6lo. Basically, we are proposing to secure the 6LowPAn ND registration to prevent theft from a third party. This echoes the past work at SeND and SAVI in a very simple fashion.
Basically the device uses a crypto ID information (like CGA) instead of the unique ID in the ARO option that can be used to validate that the next registration come from the same device. A same crypto ID can be used to register multiple addresses, and the addresses to not need to derive from the crypto ID (as opposed to SeND). It is stored at the 6LR and 6LBR, which can use ND extension to revalidate the ID ownership at any time they want.

If you agree with the need and support the idea, please contribute on the 6lo mailing list by responding the poll below.

Take care,

Pascal

From: 6lo [mailto:6lo-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of samita Chakrabarti
Sent: mardi 27 septembre 2016 03:15
To: 'lo' <6lo@ietf.org>
Cc: 6lo-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [6lo] WG adoption call for draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd-04



Hello 6lo WG:

We have discussed the following document at the IETF meetings and mailing list about the use of cryptographic ID to identify one device with a particular IPv6 address during the Neighbor Discovery Process. The crypto-ID association is helpful when MAC-ID or EUI-64 ID may not be used.
There has been fair amount of interest in securing the IP-address owner authentication using this method, in the WG meetings(IETF95).

The co-authors have addressed several WG comments in the 04 version.

The adoption call  starts now and ends on Oct 10th, 2016.

Please provide your opinion with  yes/no  answer and a short explanation for this adoption call within the deadline.

Thanks and Regards,
-Gabriel and Samita (6lo co-chairs)

>
>
> Name:           draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd
> Revision:       04
> Title:          Address Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-power and Lossy Networks
> Document date:  2016-08-22
> Group:          Individual Submission
> Pages:          17
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd-04.txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd-04
> Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd-04
>
> Abstract:
>    This document defines an extension to 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery.
>    This extension is designed for low-power and lossy network
>    environments and it supports multi-hop operation.  Nodes supporting
>    this extension compute a Cryptographically Unique Interface ID and
>    associate it with one or more of their Registered Addresses.  The
>    Cryptographic ID (Crypto-ID) uniquely identifies the owner of the
>    Registered Address.  It is used in place of the EUI-64 address that
>    is specified in RFC 6775.  Once an address is registered with a
>    Cryptographic ID, only the owner of that ID can modify the state
>    information of the Registered Address in the 6LR and 6LBR.