[Anima-bootstrap] After successful enrolment

"Michael Behringer (mbehring)" <mbehring@cisco.com> Tue, 08 November 2016 14:45 UTC

Return-Path: <mbehring@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A15DD1295FF for <anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2016 06:45:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.018
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, 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 ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1qswvHPogoWg for <anima-bootstrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2016 06:45:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75694129526 for <anima-bootstrap@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2016 06:45:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1352; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1478616327; x=1479825927; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=kF0gjE2Nlb11aFA6fcp+stQahLX1ZwMIoaHm+MKHZGs=; b=FpSZOahZiS4gN2Wc7mUBF66afL9yulazKuabCbL/KbECZEaffNIBJctb mDFQDCjbHqp8v3T4giYvm+Mmjc5Bm/6ddV18Djq2cNbcyHqPXZ/Tsbpuw QnsBESdqSyziyY8cS6dDJGP6Qw3J54A18vyusR8/Mxh3CEltACvc2lsHn o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,462,1473120000"; d="scan'208";a="171138569"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Nov 2016 14:45:15 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com (xch-aln-012.cisco.com []) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id uA8EjD6Y017902 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:45:14 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-006.cisco.com ( by XCH-ALN-012.cisco.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Tue, 8 Nov 2016 08:45:13 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-006.cisco.com ([]) by XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Tue, 8 Nov 2016 08:45:13 -0600
From: "Michael Behringer (mbehring)" <mbehring@cisco.com>
To: "Max Pritikin (pritikin)" <pritikin@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: After successful enrolment
Thread-Index: AdI5zkCHpYxSMLrXT22f0g2STLdQeg==
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 14:45:13 +0000
Message-ID: <3619162265bd4fd281da075fcad58d87@XCH-RCD-006.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima-bootstrap/PIRrv-6sp9chbwAKFFESE7r32iE>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "anima-bootstrap@ietf.org" <anima-bootstrap@ietf.org>
Subject: [Anima-bootstrap] After successful enrolment
X-BeenThere: anima-bootstrap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for the bootstrap design team of the ANIMA WG <anima-bootstrap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima-bootstrap>, <mailto:anima-bootstrap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima-bootstrap/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima-bootstrap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-bootstrap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima-bootstrap>, <mailto:anima-bootstrap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 14:45:28 -0000

> > 3.1.7
> > As mentioned in my other mail, I would prefer to call the final state here
> "enrolled". We could explain here that in the case of ANIMA, the next step is
> the establishment of the ACP, see draft ...  and in the non-ANIMA case we
> expect normal management to take place, ex via NETCONF, ... But I suggest
> to have a reference to the ACP draft.
> CONCERN: I like switching this to ‘enrolled’. Not sure what the rest of the
> suggestion is.

I think we should explain that: 
- for BRSKI, the state "enrolled" is the end of the process. 
- that, depending on context, one of several things may now happen: 
  a) an ANIMA device will now discover potential ACP neighbors
       --> point to ACP draft
  b) a non-ANIMA device can use the domain certificate to authenticate
       "normal" management protocols, such as SSH, NETCONF, etc. 

I think it is important to show what happens with those domain certs! 

Does that make sense?