[Hipsec] New WG items based on our new charter

[Gonzalo Camarillo <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

as you know, our new charter has just been approved:

http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/hip-charter.html

Now we need to finish our old chartered items and start working on our
new ones. Below you have the list of all (old and new) chartered items
with their current status. We need a WG draft for each of our chartered
items.

For some of them we already have individual submissions that could
become WG items. Please, let us know whether you support the given
individual submission to become the official draft for that chartered
item or if you want us to consider additional drafts.

For other chartered items, we still do not even have a related
individual submission (although we know of people working of those
issues). We encourage those people to submit a draft on those topics for
the WG's consideration.

> The following are charter items for the working group:
> 
> o Specify how legacy (i.e., HIP unaware) applications can be made to 
> work with HIP.

The authors of the official draft are working on addressing the
discusses received:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hip-applications-04.txt

> o Specify a solution for HIP to traverse legacy (i.e., HIP unaware) 
> NATs. This solution will be based on existing NAT traversal
> mechanisms such as ICE (Interactive Connectivity Establishment).

We have a design team working on this. They are working with the MMUSIC
folks in order to reuse their definitions of the ICE procedures.

> o Specify a native HIP socket API.

We have an official draft:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hip-native-api-04.txt

Some time ago, we decided to wait for the NAT traversal and HIP-based
overlays work to be more mature before publishing this draft. This way,
the API defined by the draft will have better chances to be future proof.

> o Specify a framework to build HIP-based overlays. This framework
> will describe how HIP can perform some of the tasks needed to build
> an overlay and how technologies developed somewhere else (e.g., a
> peer protocol developed in the P2PSIP WG) can complement HIP by
> performing the tasks HIP was not designed to perform.

We have the following individual submission:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-camarillo-hip-bone-01.txt

Would people support this draft to become a WG item?

> o Specify how to generate ORCHIDs from other node identifiers 
> including both cryptographic ones (leading to cryptographic 
> delegation) and non-cryptographic ones (e.g., identifiers defined by
> a peer protocol).

We still do not have any individual submission for this chartered item.

> o Specify how to carry certificates in the base exchange. This was 
> removed from the base HIP spec so that the mechanism is specified in
> a stand-alone spec.

We have the following individual submission:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-varjonen-hip-cert-00.txt

Would people support this draft to become a WG item?

> o Specify how to carry upper-layer data over specified HIP packets.
> These include some of the existing HIP packets and possibly new HIP
> packets (e.g., a HIP packet that occurs outside a HIP base exchange).
> 
We still do not have any individual submission for this chartered item.


Thanks,

Gonzalo
HIP co-chair
_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec