IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [CDNi] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing

Kevin Ma J <kevin.j.ma@ericsson.com> Fri, 15 July 2016 16:24 UTC

Return-Path: <kevin.j.ma@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: cdni@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cdni@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2DFC12D7EC for <cdni@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:24:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 rphzlKz_UYe4 for <cdni@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44A4512D7EA for <cdni@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:24:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c6180641-f796f6d000000e1e-cf-57890e090092
Received: from EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.93]) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 8B.47.03614.90E09875; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 18:23:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC007.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0294.000; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:24:46 -0400
From: Kevin Ma J <kevin.j.ma@ericsson.com>
To: Leif Hedstrom <leif@ogre.com>
Thread-Topic: [CDNi] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing
Thread-Index: AdHSDAIj8Q+3AOh3Q/WhloflAutMVQCa2goAASzpMYAADCKGkACC6yqAAAaL1dAANNetAAAD/kJQAJt4qgAAB2EJkA==
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:24:46 +0000
Message-ID: <A419F67F880AB2468214E154CB8A556206E5702A@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
References: <A419F67F880AB2468214E154CB8A556206E3A737@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <9E9EDA82-35E4-42D7-BCD6-B8EA88BD3BF5@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <A3CCDEAD-81BA-4E1F-B0B3-07E6F556AF73@tno.nl> <A419F67F880AB2468214E154CB8A556206E4D5FB@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <73B31A7C-CC80-4646-A7C9-401874C3B07D@tno.nl> <A419F67F880AB2468214E154CB8A556206E50C40@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <B8DB81BF-E7CE-4172-83C5-EF15FECF94B2@tno.nl> <A419F67F880AB2468214E154CB8A556206E52458@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <D0CAB929-2399-4EA3-9FAD-0CA046377648@ogre.com>
In-Reply-To: <D0CAB929-2399-4EA3-9FAD-0CA046377648@ogre.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.12]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFuphkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZXLonVpeLrzPc4EMbn8WCcxPYLJ7O/sNq 0bd8H5PFt83XGR1YPJYs+cnk8fP6JEaP9vVH2T0OrrvAHMASxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJVx+uNS 9oJLEhV3fk5jbGBskOhi5OCQEDCRWPM4v4uRE8gUk7hwbz0biC0kcJRR4vbWLAh7OaPE9yNu IDabgJbE469/mUBsEQFFiUXPX7J2MXJxMAvsZJR41XaSHSQhLOAlsb/pODtEkbfEgSO7WSDs LImDRzaB2SwCqhLL+zewgNzAK+Ar8Wa1AMgcIYEZLBIfZvwB6+UUsJHY93gtM4jNCHTc91Nr wBYzC4hL3HoynwniaAGJJXvOM0PYohIvH/9jhbCVJOa8vsYMMp9ZQFNi/S59iFZFiSndD8HG 8woISpyc+YRlAqPYLCRTZyF0zELSMQtJxwJGllWMHKXFBTm56UaGmxiBcXRMgs1xB+PeXs9D jAIcjEo8vAqX28OFWBPLiitzDzFKcDArifBO5e4MF+JNSaysSi3Kjy8qzUktPsQozcGiJM6r /1IxXEggPbEkNTs1tSC1CCbLxMEp1cC4+nB1yXSh+K/bOeonP5974JfQ5D8PnzXYdMvdnP28 YRnnw0wWoXVvu3ql5DnMfpU+XFosdjfy/8HWGR8YdA98qvLeMGH14S7l6zHMd68+2PQkcfNZ LXff1xneiyvvW9pNvaX3geEay8nyZeEi7stuizt8qTges6tjb5vaj7f/0lb08PZmueRYK7EU ZyQaajEXFScCAGQp5bCfAgAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cdni/g3YeA17hBA-fv2WnoFgk5g0koE0>
Cc: Content Delivery Networks Interconnection Discussion List <cdni@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CDNi] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing
X-BeenThere: cdni@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This list is to discuss issues associated with the Interconnection of Content Delivery Networks \(CDNs\)" <cdni.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cdni>, <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cdni/>
List-Post: <mailto:cdni@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni>, <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:24:49 -0000

Hi Leif,

  Thanks for the response.  I think it makes sense to extend the WGLC, to make sure we have time for you and Phil to review and the WG to discuss any comments.

  The WGLC was scheduled to end on July 13; we will extend it two weeks, until after IETF96, and end the WGLC on July 27th.

thanx!

--  Kevin and Francois

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Hedstrom [mailto:leif@ogre.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 11:54 AM
> To: Kevin Ma J
> Cc: Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van; Ben Niven-Jenkins; Content Delivery
> Networks Interconnection Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [CDNi] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing
> 
> 
> > On Jul 12, 2016, at 8:06 AM, Kevin Ma J <kevin.j.ma@ericsson.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ray,
> >
> >>> [Ray] In the end, I wouldn’t be surprised if some
> >>> implementations actually only implemented KID_NUM.
> >>
> >> Are there any guidelines on mandatory to
> >> support/implement IEs?  Is one allowed to only implement KID_NUM and
> not
> >> KID
> >>
> >> [Ray] Currently, we don’t have any such guidelines and an
> implementation
> >> is expected to implement all IEs (but _not_ all algorithms).
> >
> > So, if I send KID=1234 (instead of KID_NUM=1234), we would expect every
> implementation to support this?  And if I send KID=abcd, we would expect
> every implementation to support that as well?  If so, then I see no point
> in having KID_NUM.
> 
> 
> The discussion around KID_NUM actually predates the introduction of the
> package attribute. Since we now require (I think?) the packaging, the
> benefits of the KID_NUM is somewhat diminished. You’ll have to allocate
> the full memory to unpack the entire package anyways.
> 
> KID_NUM also has the benefit of well specified semantics, e.g. you could
> use a vector instead of a hash for lookups. I don’t know how important
> that is, but it certainly could have some benefits for performance. I do
> care about performance, because a valid use case of URI signing is DoS
> prevention.
> 
> I’m +0 on removing KID_NUM, as in, I can live with it being collapsed into
> just KID with no semantics (“free text”).
> 
> I’m planning on reviewing -09 this weekend, before the Berlin meeting.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> — leif

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email