Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08
<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Mon, 03 December 2018 06:47 UTC
Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 2E7E112D4EA for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 22:47:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 ucxgpL_vyH_s for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 22:47:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orange.com (mta136.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.70.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 019CF128D68 for <dots@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Dec 2018 22:47:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfednr06.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.70]) by opfednr20.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 437bC216CLz1yZl; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 07:47:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.57]) by opfednr06.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 437bC202z4zDq75; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 07:47:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::787e:db0c:23c4:71b3%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 07:47:09 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, "dots@ietf.org" <dots@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08
Thread-Index: AdSGnlgla3cLRB5MRLWQWFaJSQftBABEEW3wAAZceYAAB9nNYAAEkILwAB+EMpAACKXk4AACgplwAAhHgoAAg12NMA==
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2018 06:47:09 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E050B73@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC0184C49169@marathon> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E04F649@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <BN6PR16MB1425AD85A67FFE5A0EA5A769EAD20@BN6PR16MB1425.namprd16.prod.outlook.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E04F981@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <BN6PR16MB1425D2A6BED037A18098CF54EAD20@BN6PR16MB1425.namprd16.prod.outlook.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E04FF7F@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <BN6PR16MB1425379772574B34E678406DEAD30@BN6PR16MB1425.namprd16.prod.outlook.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302E050207@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <DM5PR16MB1436848B4B3EC35B6EF67D9BEAD30@DM5PR16MB1436.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR16MB1436848B4B3EC35B6EF67D9BEAD30@DM5PR16MB1436.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/egJs6zwJs8B_AD5UWWdX1BFMC7E>
Subject: Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 03 Dec 2018 06:47:14 -0000
Hi Tiru, I updated the file to take into account your feedback: Xml: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/blob/master/draft-ietf-dots-architecture-09.xml Diff: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/blob/master/wdiff%20draft-ietf-dots-architecture-09.txt%20draft-ietf-dots-architecture-09.pdf Cheers, Med > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Dots [mailto:dots-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Konda, Tirumaleswar > Reddy > Envoyé : vendredi 30 novembre 2018 17:14 > À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN; Roman Danyliw; dots@ietf.org > Objet : Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 > > Hi Med, > > I don't fully agree with some of the updates. I propose the following > changes: > > [1] Replace " A DOTS session can be a DOTS data channel session or a DOTS > signal channel session" with "A DOTS session can be a DOTS data channel > session or a DOTS signal channel session or both." > [2] I thought we agreed to say the following: > A DOTS signal channel session is associated with a single transport > connection (TCP or UDP session) and an ephemeral security association (e.g. a > TLS or DTLS session). Similarly, a DOTS data channel session is associated > with a single TCP connection and an ephemeral TLS security association. > [3] Direct and recursive signaling is applicable to both DOTS signal and data > channel sessions, replace "DOTS signal channel session" with "DOTS session". > [4] In Section 3.1.2, replace "session" with "DOTS session" > [5] Remove the following line: > "These sessions may belong to the same or distinct DOTS channels (signal or > data). > > Cheers, > -Tiru > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> > > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 5:40 PM > > To: Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com>; > > Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>; dots@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 > > > > This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links > or > > open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > > > > Re-, > > > > OK. Thanks. > > > > FWIW, I also made on my side some changes that I'd like to see made to fix > the > > issues we discussed so far: > > > > Xml: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/blob/master/draft- > ietf- > > dots-architecture-09.xml > > Diff: https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts- > > Reviews/blob/master/wdiff%20draft-ietf-dots-architecture-09.txt%20draft- > ietf- > > dots-architecture-09.pdf > > > > Feel free to reuse the modified version. > > > > (Removing parts that were agreed and focusing on the last pending one) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > DOTS data channel draft is not using the term "DOTS data > > > > > > > channel session", we can fix the signal channel draft to use > > > > > > > "DOTS data channel" instead of "DOTS data channel session". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Med] May be. BTW, this part of the text: > > > > > > > > > > > > " Conversely, a > > > > > > DOTS session cannot exist without an established signal channel > " > > > > > > > > > > > > is conflicting with this one: > > > > > > > > > > > > " > > > > > > To allow for DOTS > > > > > > service flexibility, neither the order of contact nor the time > > > > > > interval between channel creations is specified. A DOTS client > MAY > > > > > > establish signal channel first, and then data channel, or > > > > > > vice > > > versa." > > > > > > > > [Med] This one is still pending. > > > > > > The above line looks clear to me, what is the confusion ? > > > > > > > [Med] The problem is not with the last line with this one: > > > > "DOTS session cannot exist without an established signal channel" > > > > Which means that dots signal channel session is a pre-requisite for DOTS > data > > channel. This is conflict with the other excerpt I cited. > _______________________________________________ > Dots mailing list > Dots@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
- [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Roman Danyliw
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Panwei (William)
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- [Dots] 答复: WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Xialiang (Frank, Network Integration Technology Research Dept)
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
- Re: [Dots] WGLC on draft-ietf-dots-architecture-08 Roman Danyliw