Re: [Add] Authentication Sub-topics for Tuesday Interim (homework for Tuesday's meeting)

(1) What capabilities are we going to assume an attacker has in the local
discovery model? Do we have *any* candidate design which does anything
useful in those circumstances? If so, what does that design do?
(2) Do we have any secure way to tell clients which resolver the network
wants them to use?
(3) Assuming that we had a secure way to tell clients which resolver the
network wanted them to use, what would we want to say there?

Spoiler alert: I have opinions on the answers to these questions, but that
seems like a topic for the interim.

-Ekr

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 11:51 AM Deen, Glenn <Glenn_Deen@comcast.com> wrote:

> Hi ADD,
>
>
>
> Authentication clearly has emerged as a topic important to the group.   It
> showed up during the ADD Interim on Sept 10th in both comments and in
> jabber. Prior to that It has shown up in  drafts, list traffic and GitHub
> issues.      Coming out of the Interim yesterday it was proposed as the
> starting topic for the next interim on Tuesday Sept 15.
>
>
>
> To help focus and facilitate productive conversation the chairs would like
> to ask for the group’s help in breaking down the topic of authentication
> into sub-topics for Tuesday’s interim session.
>
>
>
> Here’s a small homework assignment for the next couple of days to help set
> the Interim agenda:  We ask that ADD participants please take a few minutes
> and post to this list thread authentication sub-topics you’d like to
> cover.
>
>
>
> To get you thinking on the question,  consider that authentication has
> come up in a variety of ADD discussions:
>
>
>
>       (1) Topic:  the question of can DHCP play a role in discovery which
> has resulted in many saying “No” since it isn’t authenticated;
>
>       (2) Topic:  the question of authentication’s role in resolver
> discovery and validation;
>
>       (3) Topic:  the question of authentication to enable identification
> of resolvers that are associated or affiliated with one another or an
> organization
>
>       ….
>
>
>
>
>
> This list is by no means complete and is meant to illustrate a few of the
> places and contexts the topic of “Authentication” has popped up recently.
>
>
>
> Please share what authentication topic, scenario, role, need you believe
> the ADD group should spend time discussing on the Tuesday agenda.
>
>
>
> Please limit discussion on this particular thread to only sharing what
> authentication sub-topic aspect you’d like to see discussed and not expand
> into a discussion of the sub-topics themselves.   Yes this all interesting
> stuff, but the thread can quickly become overwhelming for readers to
> follow.
>
>
>
> So limit, for now, responses to what you’d like to discuss – not the
> actual technical discussion.
>
>
>
> Also, this may prompt some responders to feel like now it is a good time
> to stray into policy discussions.   Please try to self-regulate and not go
> there.    ADD is limited to technical mechanisms to do discovery and a
> means to convey information about the discovered resolvers – and the
> discussion needs to stay withing those boundaries.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Glenn Deen & David Lawrence – ADD Chairs
> --
> Add mailing list
> Add@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add
>