Re: [dispatch] Proposed charter for work on logging

["Vijay K. Gurbani" <[e-mail]>]

On 06/13/2013 06:17 AM, Dawes, Peter, Vodafone Group wrote:
> Hello All, Following on from the comments at IETF#86
> (http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minutes/minutes-86-dispatch),
> where there was mild support for working on logging, I have updated
> the log me requirements draft with 3 potential solutions (in clause
> 7) which can meet the requirements
> (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dawes-dispatch-logme-reqs-02.txt).
> Opinions and comments on these or any other potential solutions would
> be very welcome.

Peter: I am not being a contrarian, just being curious.

What is the utility of a log-me marker if all traffic is logged
through a mechanism such as SIP CLF?

> It was commented at IETF#86 that a security analysis is needed so I
> would like to understand if any scenarios exist with potential
> security threats in order to add them to requirements. In many cases,
> a network simply logs the signalling that passes through it so no new
> security issues are created. Collecting end-to-end logging for
> signalling that crosses multiple networks must not compromise
> security or privacy, but I would expect networks to remove any
> security sensitive fields before forwarding signalling regardless of
> whether that signalling is of interest to logging.

We went through discussions related to all of the above points during
the SIP CLF work.  See the Security Consideration section of [1]; it
may provide you some answers.

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6872

Thanks,

- vijay
-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / [e-mail]
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/  | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq