[cicm] Use Cases

"Novikov, Lev" <lnovikov@mitre.org> Fri, 26 August 2011 20:17 UTC

Return-Path: <lnovikov@mitre.org>
X-Original-To: cicm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cicm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B111D21F8C72 for <cicm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.544
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.544 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OCGibLiywgH3 for <cicm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (smtpksrv1.mitre.org [198.49.146.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 409AE21F8AFB for <cicm@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpksrv1.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id EB7C221B15BA for <cicm@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 16:18:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imchub2.MITRE.ORG (imchub2.mitre.org [129.83.29.74]) by smtpksrv1.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E77BC21B15B6 for <cicm@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 16:18:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from IMCMBX3.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.206]) by imchub2.MITRE.ORG ([129.83.29.74]) with mapi; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 16:18:28 -0400
From: "Novikov, Lev" <lnovikov@mitre.org>
To: "CICM Discussion List (cicm@ietf.org)" <cicm@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 16:17:52 -0400
Thread-Topic: Use Cases
Thread-Index: AcxkLTeZAvR3bwFMSYqPf+pySxYTSg==
Message-ID: <F9AB58FA72BAE7449E7723791F6993ED0630EDD3B8@IMCMBX3.MITRE.ORG>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [cicm] Use Cases
X-BeenThere: cicm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: CICM Discussion List <cicm@ietf.org>
List-Id: CICM Discussion List <cicm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cicm>, <mailto:cicm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cicm>
List-Post: <mailto:cicm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cicm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cicm>, <mailto:cicm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 20:17:12 -0000

I started a rewrite of draft-lanz-cicm-lm and want to discuss the use
cases we want included in the Logical Model.

Here's a short list I've got so far:
1. Two networks each in their own security domain (archetypal
   high assurance data-in-transit case)

2. Traditional data-in-transit and -at-reset case (cf. PKCS#11)

3. One network with two security domains (cf. network storage;
   data-in-transit and -at-rest )

4. One machine with two security domains in software (cf. Vincent
   Roca's slides http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/81/slides/cicm-1.pdf)

The resulting model will be used to analyze the impact on existing
protocols where, for example, there might not be separate security
domains.

** Anything else to add to the use case list?

Thanks,
Lev