Re: [Anima-bootstrap] Can the proxy add information during bootstrap?

Michael Richardson <> Wed, 13 April 2016 13:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D253D12E187 for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 06:01:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YsOPt3aABoPa for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 06:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37B9F12DEE3 for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 06:00:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB15A2002A for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:04:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5BD63755 for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:00:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <>
To: "anima-bootstrap\" <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.4.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:00:57 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Anima-bootstrap] Can the proxy add information during bootstrap?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for the bootstrap design team of the ANIMA WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:01:14 -0000

Toerless Eckert <> wrote:
    > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:46:54PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
    >> If there's a need to discover topology, which I understood Michael B
    >> was after, couldn't that be done after enrolment, with no security
    >> risk?

    > I am sure operators would love to have the option to reject enrollment
    > if the device is in a wrong location.

<putting my operator hat on, [AS26227, AS26413]>

That's silly.  Either it's your device, or it's not.
Even if it is in the wrong location, enrolling the device makes sense.
Unless it's completely the wrong *model* and hasn't got any interfaces of the
right type, getting the new service online usually takes priority.
Installing a $300 8-port firewall instead of the $200 2-port firewall isn't a
disaster. If the model was close enough, you'd want to consider the cost of
shipping vs the cost difference of the devices.

You might ship the *correct* model out once you figure this out and have
remote hands swap cables later on, but that's essentially a capital
allocation question.

If you know enough in advance to know which device (down to the SN) was
supposed to be in each location, then I don't think you need/have a zero-touch

Michael Richardson <>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-