Re: [arch-d] Call for Comment: <draft-trammell-wire-image-04> (The Wire Image of a Network Protocol)

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Sat, 15 September 2018 17:09 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.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 C0991130DD3 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 10:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 lAWwX9vonDIW for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com (mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com [138.201.61.189]) (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 9DFB8128CB7 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xsmtp05.mail2web.com ([168.144.250.245]) by mx6.antispamcloud.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1g1E4I-000241-TC for architecture-discuss@ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 19:09:15 +0200
Received: from [10.5.2.13] (helo=xmail03.myhosting.com) by xsmtp05.mail2web.com with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1g1E3h-0006dd-G0 for architecture-discuss@ietf.org; Sat, 15 Sep 2018 13:09:11 -0400
Received: (qmail 18921 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2018 17:08:34 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.102]) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[172.56.42.28]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail03.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; 15 Sep 2018 17:08:33 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15G77)
In-Reply-To: <m2r2hur98u.wl-randy@psg.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 10:08:31 -0700
Cc: "Brian Trammell (IETF)" <ietf@trammell.ch>, IAB <iab@iab.org>, IETF-Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D27B05E4-C622-4AA7-BA2D-17654C77D132@huitema.net>
References: <153619287953.19753.5995314701986579146.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <8b52dce5-1ee4-b40b-e1ba-e7c9b241dd82@cs.tcd.ie> <6080E931-DEB6-48C8-BEB1-96A69112F67A@trammell.ch> <255e0d12-fbce-1448-90db-daadc4e39c3f@cs.tcd.ie> <m236ubsn8p.wl-randy@psg.com> <3836209E-60C5-4F55-A5AB-8D9EB6E4B935@trammell.ch> <m2r2hur98u.wl-randy@psg.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
X-Originating-IP: 168.144.250.245
X-AntiSpamCloud-Domain: xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-AntiSpamCloud-Username: 168.144.250.0/24
Authentication-Results: antispamcloud.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=168.144.250.0/24@xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-AntiSpamCloud-Outgoing-Class: ham
X-AntiSpamCloud-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.07)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: EX5BVjFpneJeBchSMxfU5lhG5erMYl4CUS67eLEsZyR602E9L7XzfQH6nu9C/Fh9KJzpNe6xgvOx q3u0UDjvO+3YL77OvPxouGQ1xMm1oSy+p7nQ/m1z/T26qK1vx/ktbNbo7palBZjCExzO+3olYo4Y 8c9Xco8e3V1ZuxwAjzrO4k7ydv2Rs1VgfbHBQGgnSBWlL1zfgiPkRstzHteqQVSZb7NUQfNrJhPP 3jH5Lw770WuzEeIYESIPDdUJWOBuPxO0jJAHsPdj1H6RNuBO64khreCqNrL+4WOj9GLtzgPgCHD3 NiRvvhYdMv5KIDZDCdOOuHrTVxzlPuSm9ELht2wEzz/Xni1guZA8Hje3K7FwV76ywZSglUY43T24 0OB5onRtKYNhy7i7D95j6YrBJU7ORMeWjWZXIFUBbQIaxIo93SsS4aMXJmiJ2G0eb5ahE3fpJQF/ ihWJCMbus8XZ/l9l1/WyLBg0mKuTgAEprJFSHDEoKrXCm1PS2vgB4ghQfb7mDHg6F7DCQw/QmRVt gx13rmuLrLsrnWZe2SVpoOWtI4g+l6rCWbY0MZcgnbHsrEwezX4IOqz4meH1anIOuTvTKr6Yod29 hXdBxSUXQJBbaquYfpS7efULvy9Q+Zv6aibwV3eyPNp9KqQs6z1oksCj1zSjZNkVWNiuZ8i4MNWf u7D5oyDN2zNIoWERNGIzzMkhI+38C8995zJ7fL9lQP1kW3XKN6SjV/ce7POAEs5gj+ipzgby+CaQ 0wqxRkctzDX+pMMjKtvWhFG1fCYNniNoFtnx8iSAmqs3WVi+auQh6gHnmRrnq4W4My7ku7ebT22D rCcnaWtlJQJmsoViwczOtL6KlFMyZryCwJJH4CAU44h5a49RtJof6CUEWx86V4I5rp7at8WYAcYX TRSVHGbt3fWTVyUFvB1MSl+bmCZrwytzyq4nhu0+m3/YUu4UdKu8QEmGgVGjrZrUpI94rsSYYexB w6I2+g/TMfoLNfhh3+MrOOK4NgfP/RZivWtTvce5bLLLmf+d7Dm4btGCTQ==
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine6.antispamcloud.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/zfks78A1Pa1K3MasVlKY33bg-2g>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Call for Comment: <draft-trammell-wire-image-04> (The Wire Image of a Network Protocol)
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: Sat, 15 Sep 2018 17:09:19 -0000

On Sep 15, 2018, at 9:55 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

>> Ok. The motivation for this draft is indeed he increasing deployment
>> and coverage of encryption down the stack, which we take as a given. A
>> few sentences to make this context clear could be useful.
> 
> i kind of liked just saying that strong encryption is becoming
> ubiquitous, is here to stay, and the ietf thinks that is a good thing.
> this has consequences for applications and middleboxes that have grown
> used to being able to see the traffic in cleartext.
> 
>> The whole point of this line of work is to define a solution space for
>> the (technical) problems that arise when “strong encryption is here to
>> stay”
> 
> for some of the consequences, there is no "solution."  this may not be a
> bug.

We discussed that a lot when reviewing Kathleen's draft. There is a grab bag of stuff that have been put under the "network management" umbrella, from monitoring whether a given path is still working to being able to insert or replace ads. There is no doubt that some of that is legit and useful. The question then is where to place the line between "yes that's useful" and "forget about it". And then, how to best accommodate the useful part when most of the packet is encrypted.

-- Christian Huitema