[dhcwg] RFC 3118, 4030 deployability and key management
"Apathotharanan, Ramasamy" <ramasamy.apathotharanan@hp.com> Wed, 04 June 2008 05:52 UTC
Return-Path: <dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dhcwg-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dhcwg-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E8073A6832; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 22:52:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4D0A3A6832 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 22:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eLzlF1Lfe5Aj for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 22:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from g1t0027.austin.hp.com (g1t0027.austin.hp.com [15.216.28.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C9F3A6804 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jun 2008 22:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from G1W0401.americas.hpqcorp.net (g1w0401.americas.hpqcorp.net [16.236.31.6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by g1t0027.austin.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF0C538CF3 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 05:52:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from G3W0628.americas.hpqcorp.net (16.233.58.53) by G1W0401.americas.hpqcorp.net (16.236.31.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.263.0; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 05:51:35 +0000
Received: from G3W0069.americas.hpqcorp.net ([16.232.1.29]) by G3W0628.americas.hpqcorp.net ([16.233.58.53]) with mapi; Wed, 4 Jun 2008 05:51:35 +0000
From: "Apathotharanan, Ramasamy" <ramasamy.apathotharanan@hp.com>
To: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 05:51:33 +0000
Thread-Topic: RFC 3118, 4030 deployability and key management
Thread-Index: AcjGAysAtDTjuo53QrSd7pw9xNz/EQAAEXPgAACtQYA=
Message-ID: <0B7321213E14104192D2E1D428363B5A0869078576@G3W0069.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [dhcwg] RFC 3118, 4030 deployability and key management
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Hi,
I am interested in the deployability of RFC 3118 and 4030.
I found that related topics were discussed from the year 2002 to 2006. The two broad areas of interest that were discussed fall under:
(1) what are the possible threats to DHCP
(2) coming up with other protocols to fill the gaps in RFC 3118 framework to address the identified threats/issues.
Though I found mention of the following drafts -- "draft-ietf-dhc-v4-threat-analysis-03.txt" and "draft-gupta-dhcp-auth-02.txt" , I was not able to get subsequent details on them.
I searched the mail archives. Still could not find answers to the following questions and it would be great to get these questions answered:
1. Is the problem of key management still relevant today for RFC 3118 & 4030 (The DHC charter still mentions this as a goal)? Is anyone working in this area OR has it moved to some other working group?
2. The threat-analysis draft document ("draft-ietf-dhc-v4-threat-analysis-03.txt") is supposed to provide inputs for possible extensions to RFC 3118. Can anyone provide details on the status of this document?
3. What is the status on an extension ("draft-gupta-dhcp-auth-02.txt") proposed to RFC 3118 by Vipul Gupta.
4. Finally, any other issues that prevent wide spread deployability of RFC 3118 & 4030?
Thanks & Regards
-Ramudu
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
- [dhcwg] RFC 3118, 4030 deployability and key mana… Apathotharanan, Ramasamy