Re: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles

"Panwei (William)" <william.panwei@huawei.com> Fri, 26 July 2019 11:15 UTC

Return-Path: <william.panwei@huawei.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 1FB141202FB for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 04:15:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.631
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, INVALID_MSGID=0.568, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 6rJZGWvryPOt for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 04:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (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 A21E712024F for <dots@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 04:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 3F2374646ABDC38235A2; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 12:15:49 +0100 (IST)
Received: from NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.74) by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 12:15:48 +0100
Received: from NKGEML513-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.207]) by NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 19:12:10 +0800
From: "Panwei (William)" <william.panwei@huawei.com>
To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>, "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com>, Valery Smyslov <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com>, "dots@ietf.org" <dots@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles
Thread-Index: AdVC85i4bFch/Zy8RxyBqvTQ1hxRMP//l+iAgAD+xQCAABi9gIAAAsKAgACskTQ=
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 11:12:09 +0000
Message-ID: 2426C851-FB5E-4031-B64B-1C8166491C2A
References: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330312E88FA@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <01db01d54302$9bef3b40$d3cdb1c0$@gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330312E9380@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <DM5PR16MB17050CF9AF89A83E5425C4A5EAC00@DM5PR16MB1705.namprd16.prod.outlook.com>, <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330312E9427@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
In-Reply-To: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330312E9427@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_004_2426C851FB5E4031B64B1C8166491C2A_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/jQhpRlXTqIS_s3z3bqQ4FMkw6GE>
Subject: Re: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles
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: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 11:15:55 -0000

Hi,

I agree with Med. This maybe confused for people who are not familiar with this spec.
The confusing part can be at the situation where base siganl channel and call home channel are used at the same time. In this case there are two kinds of DOTS client/server, we must emphasize DOTS client used in base signal channel and DOTS client used in call home signal channel to separate them. I think the new terms will make this difference better for both understanding and expressing.
BTW, I suggest giving 'Call Home Signal Channel' a term definition at the same time.



--------------------------------------------------
潘伟 William
Mobile: +86-18551640326<tel:+86-18551640326>
Email: william.panwei@huawei.com<mailto:william.panwei@huawei.com>
发件人:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>;
收件人:Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy <TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com>;Valery Smyslov <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com>;dots@ietf.org <dots@ietf.org>;
时间:2019-07-26 04:54:48
主 题:Re: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles

Re-,

Please see inline.

Cheers,
Med

De : Dots [mailto:dots-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy
Envoyé : vendredi 26 juillet 2019 10:45
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN; Valery Smyslov; dots@ietf.org
Objet : Re: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles

I don’t see any such terminology used in other specifications like https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8071. Why do we need “Call Home” prefix even after the text clarifies the roles clearly ?
[Med] For us who are familiar with the text, there is no confusion. But I hear the comment from Valery as this may be confusing in some places. It is worth to clarify at this stage rather than spending extra cycles when the document advances in the process.

If we go with this change all the figures needs to modified, and these terms need to be defined before being used.
[Med] No all of the figures, but only when there is a confusion.

Cheers,
-Tiru

From: Dots <dots-bounces@ietf.org>; On Behalf Of mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2019 12:46 PM
To: Valery Smyslov <smyslov.ietf@gmail.com>;; dots@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles


CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


________________________________
Hi Valery,


We didn’t consider the use of new terms because we thought this may be interpreted as if we are defining new DOTS roles (which we don’t).



The text uses “in the call home scenario” to make that distinction in some places, but I understand this may not be sufficient.



I’m OK to go with “Call Home DOTS *”. I updated the terminology section with the following:



   DOTS agents involved in the DOTS Call Home adhere to the DOTS roles

   as defined in [RFC8612].  For clarity, this document uses "Call Home

   DOTS client" (or "Call Home DOTS server") to refer to a DOTS client

   (or DOTS server) deployed in a Call Home scenario.



and changed the text when it makes sense. The full diff is available at:



https://github.com/boucadair/dots-call-home/blob/master/wdiff%20draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-04.txt%20draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-05.pdf



candidate -05: https://github.com/boucadair/dots-call-home/blob/master/draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-05.txt



Please let us know if this is better.



Thank you.



Cheers,

Med

De : Valery Smyslov [mailto:smyslov.ietf@gmail.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 25 juillet 2019 18:04
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed TGI/OLN; dots@ietf.org<mailto:dots@ietf.org>
Objet : RE: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles

Hi Med,

thank you for adding this section, it really helps.
However, I was asking for more - did you consider
changing the terminology in such a way, that
Call Home use case is not mixed with basic DOTS use case?

For example, calling entities not just DOTS Client and DOTS
Server, but say Call Home DOTS Client and Call Home DOTS Server?
(actually I don't like these ad hoc names, probably you can invent better term)..

Regards,
Valery.


From: Dots <dots-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:dots-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 5:17 PM
To: dots@ietf.org<mailto:dots@ietf.org>
Subject: [Dots] draft-ietf-dots-call-home: Clarify DOTS Agent Roles

Re-,

There was a comment raised during the meeting asking to further clarify the role of the various DOTS agent in the call home. We added an new section to address this comment: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-04#section-1.4

Cheers,
Med