Re: [arch-d] possible new IAB programme on Internet resilience

Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> Fri, 20 December 2019 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <stephane@sources.org>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B662A120856 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:13:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 YJYeYztASRxw for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:13:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (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 28F1412084D for <architecture-discuss@iab.org>; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id E4F4FA029E; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:13:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A27F8C98E5; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:10:26 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:10:26 +0100
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
To: Simon Leinen <simon.leinen@switch.ch>
Cc: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>, architecture-discuss@iab.org
Message-ID: <20191220171026.GA28942@sources.org>
References: <f13e1588-35e0-2493-93d2-add3480bb207@cs.tcd.ie> <EAF951A6-71A3-4B83-8881-7D96DE67E1F1@viagenie.ca> <aa7e2reyhv.fsf@switch.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <aa7e2reyhv.fsf@switch.ch>
X-Transport: UUCP rules
X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 10.2
X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/jKMx1O0e_0bZywM1iMDQg24zzY8>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] possible new IAB programme on Internet resilience
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 17:13:12 -0000

On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 05:46:20PM +0100,
 Simon Leinen <simon.leinen@switch.ch> wrote 
 a message of 19 lines which said:

> While it's generally a good idea to not advertise or forward what's
> wrong, I think this is a general security consideration that I wouldn't
> associate with resilience (maybe more with "resistance" to
> attack/damage).
> 
> In fact, one could argue that in the presence of restrictive definitions
> of "right", what you suggest will actually make the system less
> resilient (though more secure, at least from the perspective of those
> holding narrow definitions of "right").

Indeed, the current project of charter seems to be more about
robustness than about resilience.

(And, yes, security can decrease robustness, think of DNSSEC or PKIX
validation issues.)