Re: [arch-d] Possible new IAB program on Internet trust model evolution

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Wed, 29 January 2020 17:48 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 4477012011B for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:48:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 MN1gjx7xeLdO for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:48:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:1829::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 893271200F7 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:48:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A22B6601DF; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:48:07 +0200 (EET)
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LJioIbG64MsG; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:48:06 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:1829::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFC78660135; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:48:05 +0200 (EET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <dff1c31e-44d4-6045-aaeb-03ac1e855200@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 18:48:04 +0100
Cc: model-t@iab.org, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CCFCB85F-6154-4046-A275-4CC2065310E2@piuha.net>
References: <E2D709DC-DD01-4946-B2F1-7EE0E101DEF0@piuha.net> <dff1c31e-44d4-6045-aaeb-03ac1e855200@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/tJ_NGSwiOx9M4VrqGoHCiVnuWuU>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Possible new IAB program on Internet trust model evolution
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: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 17:48:13 -0000

Brian,

> I really do not want to see the pragmatic purpose of RFC3552 lost in the
> effort to define these abstractions. I don't think that is the intention,
> but the text seems to imply that RFC3552 was mainly a description of a
> generic threat model, which it wasn’t.

I agree of course. This is a small part of 3552. We are only considering
trends in the world that may affect that small part.

> Incidentally, while writing the above it occurred to me why the phrase
> "IAB program" has always slightly disturbed me. Really the proposal is
> a virtual IAB workshop (whereas RFC2316 came from three days in a room
> together in Murray Hill, NJ). A good idea, but not a program.

Perhaps, but it is worth stating that at least from my perspective the
concept of an IAB program has differed depending on the topic at hand,
and perhaps more importantly, has evolved over time. Right now the
topics under consideration are mostly entirely open. This is fitting for the
two topics that we have brought up, but it is also at least in my impression
a shift in thinking, for openness obviously but also maybe bit of short term
goal of addressing a specific issue vs. very long-running programs. The
experiences from the latter haven’t always been promising.

Jari