Re: [Din] Draft / Specification of the GNU Name System

"Schanzenbach, Martin" <schanzen@gnunet.org> Sun, 24 January 2021 09:49 UTC

Return-Path: <schanzen@gnunet.org>
X-Original-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: din@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2220B3A11F6 for <din@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 01:49:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.533
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, 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 Rt84oSj3jlJ8 for <din@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 01:49:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout01.posteo.de (mout01.posteo.de [185.67.36.141]) (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 739F63A11F5 for <din@irtf.org>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 01:49:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEE8616005F for <din@irtf.org>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 10:49:17 +0100 (CET)
Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4DNp9m256mz9rxQ; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 10:49:16 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8E3FB01A-4A21-4E4A-8512-4A67A70DC74E"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
From: "Schanzenbach, Martin" <schanzen@gnunet.org>
In-Reply-To: <F3927A5E-CA94-4CA7-B621-C3D97FFA818A@dkutscher.net>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 10:49:15 +0100
Cc: din@irtf.org
Message-Id: <22429DD8-63A6-470E-96F1-18D35140232B@gnunet.org>
References: <2E228AD3-F5C7-42A6-B59D-5D523E35E5B8@gnunet.org> <52ffde7e4f51f4f88c84fe73cb4727bd1d04e22c.camel@gnunet.org> <F3927A5E-CA94-4CA7-B621-C3D97FFA818A@dkutscher.net>
To: Dirk Kutscher <ietf@dkutscher.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/din/CbGmT9wOWTiVg1SR5snV2Rvfr6M>
Subject: Re: [Din] Draft / Specification of the GNU Name System
X-BeenThere: din@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of distributed Internet Infrastructure approaches, aspects such as Service Federation, and underlying technologies" <din.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/din>, <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/din/>
List-Post: <mailto:din@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/din>, <mailto:din-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 09:49:27 -0000

Hi Dirk,

just wanting to touch base if there will be a DINRG meeting at the next IETF?
We have continued working on the draft and there have further been efforts to more cleanly specify the set reconciliation for zone revocation in a general fashion here [1].

Of course we are still available and interested in presenting/discussing the GNS draft at DINRG.

Best
Martin

[1] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-summermatter-set-union-00.txt

> On 8. Dec 2020, at 21:01, Dirk Kutscher <ietf@dkutscher.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi Martin,
> 
>> we wanted to check back with you if it makes sense to coordinate next
>> week at IETF 109. It seems as if dinrg is not (yet) listed on the
>> agenda?
>> 
>> According to the minutes of IETF 108, the next steps would involve
>> coordination/deconflicting with DINRG:
>> https://codimd.ietf.org/notes-ietf-108-secdispatch#
> 
> thanks for bringing this up and apologies for the late reply.
> 
> We didn't meet around IETF-109.
> 
> This is definitely an interesting topic for DINRG, and we should talk about it at an upcoming meetings.
> 
> We are currently planning upcoming meetings etc., and we should have a more concrete plan for early 2021 activities after new year.
> 
> In the meantime, please feel free to use the mailing list as well.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dirk
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Best Regards
>> Martin
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, 2020-10-18 at 15:13 +0200, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
>>> Dear DINRG,
>>> 
>>> at IETF 104, we have presented to you our work on the GNU Name System
>>> [1].
>>> Since then, we have been working on improvements and a technical
>>> specification of the system [2].
>>> At IETF 108, we appeared at secdispatch in order to discuss if the
>>> draft may fit into any existing WG in IETF (or IRTF) [3].
>>> We were encouraged to ask DINRG if it would be interested in this
>>> work and continue improving and working on it (see minutes of
>>> secdispatch). Your charter would certainly support the general theme
>>> of the protocol: "The evolution of distributed ledger technologies
>>> and the platforms that leverage them has given rise to the
>>> development of decentralized communication and infrastructure
>>> systems, and experiments with the same. Some examples include name
>>> resolution (Namecoin, Ethereum Name Service), identity management
>>> (OneName), distributed storage (IPFS, MaidSafe), distributed
>>> applications, or DApps (Blockstack), and IP address allocation and
>>> delegation."
>>> 
>>> Since our appearance at secdispatch, we have received a lot of
>>> feedback from the community and experts. We have taken the time to
>>> incorporate the feedback and the result is in the current version of
>>> the draft as well as our implementation.
>>> As you can see, the draft versions 01 and 02 differ significantly.
>>> The two major changes regarding the protocol that we have made are:
>>> 
>>> 1. Improve crypto agility: Allow other zone key types and key
>>> derivation schemes and define the required properties.
>>> 2. Improve crypto implementation: The used symmetric encryption
>>> scheme has been replaced to be more resilient to IND-CCA
>>> 
>>> For (1.) we have drafted an alternative scheme based on Schnorr
>>> signatures. This instantiation is still a draft and not implemented.
>>> Any feedback here is specifically welcomed and helpful.
>>> 
>>> Finally, we would be happy to appear at the next IETF and discuss
>>> whether DINRG would be a place to continue our work with you.
>>> 
>>> Best
>>> Martin
>>> 
>>> [1]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/104/slides/slides-104-dinrg-gnu-name-system-00.pdf
>>> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schanzen-gns/
>>> [3]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/108/agenda/agenda-108-secdispatch-02
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Din mailing list
>> Din@irtf.org
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/din
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Din mailing list
> Din@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/din