Re: [Anima] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Fri, 03 August 2018 00:37 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25D77130F36; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:37:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 lPzL9NYzxPqm; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:37:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu [18.9.25.14]) (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 661BA130F35; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:37:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 1209190e-d0fff70000007735-2d-5b63a3cb1fc7
Received: from mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.36]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 60.F1.30517.BC3A36B5; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 20:37:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w730bQbr010869; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 20:37:28 -0400
Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w730bM7m024576 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 2 Aug 2018 20:37:24 -0400
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 19:37:22 -0500
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, anima-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane@ietf.org, anima@ietf.org, jiangsheng@huawei.com
Message-ID: <20180803003719.GF68224@kduck.kaduk.org>
References: <153316981032.22048.6996271018423269893.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0ee7b107-26ac-f7a7-9856-e91bb0c70c04@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0ee7b107-26ac-f7a7-9856-e91bb0c70c04@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprIKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nontmcXK0wbebghb9J86xWzxcdJ3J ou3iPiaLxYd3sFnM+DOR2WLh+rXMDmweO2fdZfdoOfKW1WPJkp9MAcxRXDYpqTmZZalF+nYJ XBnzPs9kKdgpUPH593KmBsYNvF2MnBwSAiYSV3ZfZOti5OIQEljMJLF64hooZwOjxNXva9kh nCtMEg8ObWUHaWERUJGY9GQZC4jNBmQ3dF9mBrFFBIwlGrtOs4I0MAvMZ5TYOvMKUAMHh7BA lUTfLA6QGl6gdd2Nm6E2NDBK9K/sZIJICEqcnPkEbCizgJbEjX8vmUB6mQWkJZb/A+vlFLCV mDj5AVi5qICyxN6+Q+wTGAVmIemehaR7FkL3AkbmVYyyKblVurmJmTnFqcm6xcmJeXmpRbrG ermZJXqpKaWbGEGhzSnJt4NxUoP3IUYBDkYlHt4LqsnRQqyJZcWVuYcYJTmYlER5+cuBQnxJ +SmVGYnFGfFFpTmpxYcYJTiYlUR433YC5XhTEiurUovyYVLSHCxK4rz3asKjhQTSE0tSs1NT C1KLYLIyHBxKErzPFwE1ChalpqdWpGXmlCCkmTg4QYbzAA2/DlLDW1yQmFucmQ6RP8Woy/Hn /dRJzEIsefl5qVLivAdAigRAijJK8+DmgFKSRPb+mleM4kBvCfMuAKniAaYzuEmvgJYwAS3J dkwEWVKSiJCSamBcpRC3/O+2DTF3LUP7tr89vqrvpg3fJz71jw+e7Xi9cMfL037qAhZH3t0S bn9+/1zl7bCLk5pfW89mMeLevtH6+tzUmatFj/BnsZWKT1m9bW1jlUbhujszVZNuXNjyg/EV q31x3vS4QmunM00CS3/FlCgsWWQlsJzB9Kbwm3N/a40V5+/+5Simp8RSnJFoqMVcVJwIADtg 2gEkAwAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/JiF7yfd2m0DQ3-rGpx6vMlhzWvI>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2018 00:37:43 -0000

On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 02:09:08PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 02/08/2018 12:30, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> ....
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > DISCUSS:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ....
> > In particular, in its current form, it's not clear to me why this document
> > is targeting the standards-track -- there are lots of places where
> > determinations of what works best or how to do some things is left for
> > future work.
> 
> We had no choice, because this is a normative reference for GRASP, since
> GRASP requires at least one secure transport substrate.

That seems like a pretty specious argument -- it assumes as a prior that
GRASP also must be standards-track, and ignores the well-established
downref process.

On the other hand, the ANIMA milestones do say to "submit autonomic
control plane solution to the IESG (Standards Track)".  (The charter itself
does not say anything about document status.)  On the gripping hand, the
IESG does have the authority to determine the track on which a document is
published.

> It's true, I think, that the draft could do a better job of
> separating the well-defined normative requirements from the issues
> that are to a considerable extent implementation-dependent. But I

But I'd prefer to see these improvements made than debate the above.

> don't agree that it's at the Experimental stage, because it has a
> pedigree in proprietary code. Please consider that it is only
> asking for *Proposed* Standard status.

Could you enlighten me about this pedigree?  Is it just the Autonomic
Networking project from Cisco, or is there more (or even indepnedent
implementations)?

> > I also think the document needs to be more clear about what security
> > properties it does or does not intend to provide: 
> 
> I agree that this could be more clearly stated. By implication,
> it's this:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-anima-grasp-15#section-2.5.1

Thanks, that's a great start.

-Benjamin