Re: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-03.txt
"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Thu, 17 November 2016 21:26 UTC
Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.com>
X-Original-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79EDC12953B for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:26:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.945
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.945 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845] autolearn=no 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 1n3JqiXFgbkc for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:26:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (50-245-122-97-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.245.122.97]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38CB81294C9 for <dots@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 13:26:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=31.133.152.135;
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: dots@ietf.org
References: <147939617386.1746.17021745002346494502.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <147939617386.1746.17021745002346494502.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 16:24:01 -0500
Message-ID: <02b801d24118$ebccbe10$c3663a30$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQHk/Q+VDj1rlUmyX6TwnwToXroWj6C4MnLg
Content-Language: en-us
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/3b1LiNWhjrhtMWEBiRMjI8u4Ka4>
Subject: Re: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-03.txt
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for discussion of DDoS Open Threat Signaling \(DOTS\) technology and directions." <dots.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dots/>
List-Post: <mailto:dots@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 21:26:35 -0000
Roland, Stefan, Daniel, Robert, Nik, Frank, and Kaname-san: This addition was very helpful in understanding the intra-domain context of DOTS: There are several merits of using DOTS signaling in an intra-organizational manner: 1. It will facilitate interoperability between DDoS solutions/ services by providing a standards-based, programmatic communications mechanism 2. It will reduce time to initiate DDoS mitigation services The required data exchange between DOTS client and DOTS server may be equivalent to or a subset of information set of inter-organizational use cases. Section 3.4 was very useful as it described a pre-agreed contract with the following elements: mutual authentication between all elements (intra and inter- organization) and DDoS service requested from multiple peered DOTS organizations (via bi-lateral agreements or broker/orchestrator). Section A.1.1 - indicates that the DOTS client must be linked to the routing devices (CPE, PE) and security devices (DDoS detection devices). What I still need help with based on Appendix A - is how much is the DOTS signaling protocol and how much is the collaboration with other existing mechanisms. What I am struggling with in this description is how much is in-band and how much is out-of-band? Do you utilize other protocols (BGP Flow-specification)? In all of these questions, theoretical best mechanisms are NOT my focus. What DOTS must support is the transition of the existing mechanisms to an array of inter-operable solutions based on the IETF protocol. After chatting with you-all I really think there is unique about the DOTs signaling protocol, but I am pushing to define when, where, how, and why. I will not be able to join you today - as I have duties for the IETF NOMCOM. Thanks for all the wonderful discussions this week. Sue ============== Spelling nit: Inter-organizational: a DOTS communications relationship between distinct organizations with separate spans of administrative control. Typical inter-organizational DOTS communication relationships would be between a DDoS mitigation service provider and an end-customer organizational which requires DDoS mitigation assistance; between multiple DDoS mitigation service providers coordinating mutual defense of a mutual end-customer; or between DDoS mitigation service providers which are requesting additional DDoS mitigation assistance in for attacks which exceed their inherent DDoS mitigation capacities and/or capabilities. /organizational/organization/ -----Original Message----- From: Dots [mailto:dots-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 10:23 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: dots@ietf.org Subject: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-03.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the DDoS Open Threat Signaling of the IETF. Title : Use cases for DDoS Open Threat Signaling Authors : Roland Dobbins Stefan Fouant Daniel Migault Robert Moskowitz Nik Teague Liang Xia Kaname Nishizuka Filename : draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-03.txt Pages : 23 Date : 2016-11-17 Abstract: The DDoS Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) effort is intended to provide a protocol that facilitates interoperability between multivendor solutions/services. This document presents use cases to evaluate the interactions expected between the DOTS components as well as the DOTS exchanges. The purpose of the use cases is to identify the interacting DOTS component, how they collaborate and what are the types of information to be exchanged. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dots-use-cases/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-03 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ Dots mailing list Dots@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
- [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-03.t… internet-drafts
- [Dots] FW: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-… Xialiang (Frank)
- Re: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-… Susan Hares
- Re: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-… Roland Dobbins
- Re: [Dots] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-… Teague, Nik