[Detnet] Security for the MPLS data plane
Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Fri, 31 July 2020 08:55 UTC
Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: detnet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C9833A10FC for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 01:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ikPueQXc9nRt for <detnet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 01:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mta6.iomartmail.com (mta6.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.156]) (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 D2D803A10F0 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 01:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs2.iomartmail.com (vs2.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.123]) by mta6.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06V8taZu001073 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:55:36 +0100
Received: from vs2.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDEAD22052 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:55:35 +0100 (BST)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.224]) by vs2.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBA8522050 for <detnet@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:55:35 +0100 (BST)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([84.51.134.26]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06V8tYU6028825 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for <detnet@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:55:35 +0100
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: detnet@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:55:33 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <010201d66718$5a578710$0f069530$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AdZnF/Rt857ctunFTf27nNEw7J79kQ==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 84.51.134.26
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-25574.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--2.955-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--2.955-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-25574.006
X-TMASE-Result: 10--2.955300-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: VZz6+2A6wpr0d2KBPeDt5k4eFUkH5CFcpQH4ogtVQP1otgYQz348Z0h4 FFTKCL9hdFF9u4ac8ZNvF0V6H22he3RZ+7ylW+hH8KQMqZXaCzmmJtY0iSfJ/Q5sitnRwXwsOF1 MgOSlvni2bLK+wLh706O3VYTcuffLSSOWVJeuO1A5f9Xw/xqKXVsKO+9Zlb5JF+mKQsO55d4UGm 4zriL0oQtuKBGekqUpnH7sbImOEBTddD4IC4f8dNXRaq7hr+/hPxvevfbmYrnmkiYPD7EicBywl fYQiIvjrKtEdagwBcm/mRgHI8RrJKAHzYYyrpUIkqYEVwnMRd70eYCwzXW/S7jmaMoghhjfGIJp 31oEpZ+b2n9EL31MnkuFvzEYSdV+
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/detnet/YcDGH9J-NMhYnKE4TNpfD6kFkRU>
Subject: [Detnet] Security for the MPLS data plane
X-BeenThere: detnet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Deterministic Networking BoF and Proposed WG <detnet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/detnet/>
List-Post: <mailto:detnet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet>, <mailto:detnet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 08:55:41 -0000
Hi DetNet, I'm currently doing a RtgDir review for draft-ietf-detnet-security I noticed in section 9 that there is discussion of the sub-layer security measures for IP and Ethernet networks, but (of course?) no mention of security for MPLS encapsulations. In that context I wondered if Detnet has any interest in https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mpls-opportunistic-encrypt-03.txt Thanks, Adrian
- [Detnet] Security for the MPLS data plane Adrian Farrel