Re: [6tisch] WGLC for https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-17.txt

Mališa Vučinić <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr> Wed, 12 December 2018 12:57 UTC

Return-Path: <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr>
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 C62C9126DBF for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 04:57:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.92
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 0Hikoi2Mt7MF for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 04:57:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77C18126F72 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 04:57:19 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,344,1539640800"; d="scan'208,217";a="359980040"
Received: from mail-qt1-f171.google.com ([209.85.160.171]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-GCM-SHA256; 12 Dec 2018 13:57:17 +0100
Received: by mail-qt1-f171.google.com with SMTP id d19so20274358qtq.9 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 04:57:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbCJajbfbYGQY9+cI11bfjI978Gr700CUP0AZ5vahGsdfh4w4Dh 5FSAKZWRXllP01a5HkBUyuiHZxAkKTSwsMmNMm0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/XlPEErHBSZdqnOcOSVBpCIivoU9P/7FT3ZNYh9bj+Vg6vM493Y+N08R65UhDccZy/V8eYhRTYmXoD41f1vwbY=
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:9a4a:: with SMTP id q10mr18694033qvd.150.1544619436571; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 04:57:16 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <eaeba2a200c644738778e865a5f539b2@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <CANDGjyeaD1=_ogUEpEKbjwqT8+UA_kvOdeiUjaOKYZGnYqKn0A@mail.gmail.com> <4efc02ce5ff340158078a0cfca69e698@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <CANDGjyftAFwLgdzyd0xr2LDnwDTm-WO=BWmhWMioKHw4icA+rQ@mail.gmail.com> <7ec1a3dc9bb942139dc70484f70f9e5d@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <7ec1a3dc9bb942139dc70484f70f9e5d@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
From: Mališa Vučinić <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 13:57:03 +0100
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CANDGjydq8o0bQ3DnE+3gptnsszD6nDcTgdV3FHLTC+GRheBOSw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CANDGjydq8o0bQ3DnE+3gptnsszD6nDcTgdV3FHLTC+GRheBOSw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d48643057cd2bc7a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/KS90O36GymoG8ZhFFHsBIuKDdhQ>
Subject: Re: [6tisch] WGLC for https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-17.txt
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 12:57:23 -0000

Thanks Pascal, looks good!

Mališa

On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 1:51 PM Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:

> Hello Mališa
>
>
>
> Please see below ( I pushed the result in the repo, please let me know if
> we are OK now )
>
>
>
> *From:* 6tisch <6tisch-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of *Mališa Vucinic
> *Sent:* mercredi 12 décembre 2018 15:01
>
>
> *To:* Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>
>
> *Cc:* Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>; 6tisch@ietf.org
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [6tisch] WGLC for
> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-17.txt
>
>
>
> Hello Pascal,
>
>
>
> Most of the resolutions to my comments look good. Couple of nits inline.
>
>
>
> Mališa
>
>
>
> *[PT>] *I think we need to define an entry for CoJP, similar to 6P. What
> about;
>
>    CoJP (Constrained Join Protocol):  CoJP is a one-touch join protocol
>
>                defined in the Minimal Security Framework for 6TiSCH
>
>                [I-D.ietf-6tisch-minimal-security].  CoJP requires the
>
>                distribution of preshared keys (PSK), and enables a node
>
>                to join with a single round trip to the JRC via the JP.
>
>
>
> How about:
>
> CoJP (Constrained Join Protocol): CoJP enables a pledge to securely join a
> 6TiSCH network by distributing network parameters over a secure channel.
> CoJP is defined in the Minimal Security Framework for 6TiSCH
> [I-D.ietf-6tisch-minimal-security]. In the minimal setup with pre-shared
> keys defined in [I-D.ietf-6tisch-minimal-security], CoJP allows the pledge
> to join the network in a single round trip exchange.
>
> *[PT>] *
>
> *The second sentence is extraneous, correct?*
>
> *[PT>] what about*
>
>
>
>    CoJP (Constrained Join Protocol):  The Constrained Join Protocol
>
>                (CoJP) enables a pledge to securely join a 6TiSCH network
>
>                and obtain network parameters over a secure channel.  In
>
>                the minimal setup with pre-shared keys defined in
>
>                [I-D.ietf-6tisch-minimal-security], CoJP can operate with
>
>                a single round trip exchange.
>
>
>
> =====================================================
>
> Section 3.1: 6TiSCH Stack
>
>
> - add Constrained Join Protocol in the Figure above CoAP. Use “Constrained
> Join Protocol” instead of “Minimal Security Framework for 6TiSCH”.
>
> - Description of DTLS seems as a remnant. I would stress OSCORE here as
> the primacy choice with DTLS also being an option for applications.
>
> *[PT>] *
>
> *[PT>] *This gives :
>
>
>
>       +--------+--------+
>
>       |  CoJP  | Applis |
>
>       +--------+--------+--------------+-----+
>
>       | CoAP / OSCORE   |  6LoWPAN ND  | RPL |
>
>       +-----------------+--------------+-----+
>
>       |       UDP       |      ICMPv6        |
>
>       +-----------------+--------------------+
>
>       |                 IPv6                 |
>
>       +--------------------------------------+----------------------+
>
>       |     6LoWPAN HC   /   6LoRH HC        | Scheduling Functions |
>
>       +--------------------------------------+----------------------+
>
>       |     6top (to be IEEE Std 802.15.12) inc. 6top protocol      |
>
>       +-------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>       |                 IEEE Std 802.15.4 TSCH                      |
>
>       +-------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
>
> Nit: Swap Applis and CoJP to have control plane "kind of" on the left side
> :-).
>
>
>
> *[PT>] OK*
>
>
>
> Security Considerations in WIP-19:
>
>    As detailed in Section 6, a pledge that wishes to join the 6TiSCH
>
>    network must participate to a join process to obtain its security
>
>    keys.
>
>
>
> Nits: Replace "must participate to a join process" with "must trigger the
> join protocol".
>
> *[PT>] *
>
> *OK, but  “must use” then. You do not trigger a protocol, you trigger its
> operation.*
>
>
>
>    The join process can be zero-touch and leverage ANIMA procedures, as
>
>    detailed in the 6tisch Zero-Touch Secure Join protocol
>
>    [I-D.ietf-6tisch-dtsecurity-zerotouch-join].
>
>    Alternatively, the join process can be one-touch, in which case the
>
>    pledge is provisioned with a preshared key (PSK), and uses CoJP as
>
>    specified in [I-D.ietf-6tisch-minimal-security].
>
>
>
> Proposal to replace the paragraph above with:
>
>
>
> The join protocol used in 6TiSCH is Constrained Join Protocol (CoJP). In
> the minimal setting defined in [I-D.ietf-6tisch-minimal-security], the
> authentication is based on a pre-shared key, based on which a secure
> session is derived. CoJP exchange may also be preceded with a zero-touch
> handshake [I-D.ietf-6tisch-dtsecurity-zerotouch-join] in order to enable
> pledge joining based on certificates and/or inter-domain communication.
>