Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com> Mon, 15 September 2014 12:34 UTC
Return-Path: <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A86021A031C for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 05:34:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 zlV6k8uqcnKa for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 05:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sessmg23.ericsson.net (sessmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 904FF1A0316 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 05:34:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-f793d6d000005356-a3-5416dcb8ff4e
Received: from ESESSHC006.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sessmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 99.29.21334.8BCD6145; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 14:34:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail.lmf.ericsson.se (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.174.1; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 14:34:00 +0200
Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se [131.160.33.3]) by mail.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F55C11029B; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 15:34:00 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5125A4E98A; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 15:35:25 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D584E947; Mon, 15 Sep 2014 15:35:24 +0300 (EEST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5F48FE18-1896-4ACA-B33B-E4B45FE8C0AE"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <5416CF8D.1070707@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 15:33:58 +0300
Message-ID: <633A010F-1456-479A-ABCE-52EAD14C7346@ericsson.com>
References: <20140905182558.7340.5516.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <540A04E3.2040203@tomh.org> <9BFCB5CC-FD77-49C2-9A67-39AEB45530D1@nominum.com> <540B2A2E.9040905@tomh.org> <540C3EB0.2000004@gmail.com> <5416CF8D.1070707@ericsson.com>
To: Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrFIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje6OO2IhBl2HjC0OLb7EajGz5x+j xaGXf5gtpi6azGwxfe81dout3bEWF9b/YrFovPuHyYHDo2VVL7PH2u6rbB6rXrWzeeycdZfd Y8mSn0weM49/YfF4fWA+q8eeaxoBHFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGW8XLmArWOFY0bfyFlMD4zGb LkZODgkBE4n3/ecYIWwxiQv31rOB2EICRxklmqfJdzFyAdkbGCUenz7IBOHsZZRY2tDFBuGs A3LePWSBcOYxStxsv8MO4jALTGGU2Nm2mgVkGK+AgcTx7z/BbGEBC4nt+y6BLWQT0JLYuHwB 2EJOAR2Jef23wGwWAVWJfzMWMkMMWs0ksXTvLCaIQfYSuy+9gFr3nFFi2pzzzCAJEQEzicVt a5gg3pCX+PDhODuErSZx9dwmZoiXVCRu/T3LNoFRZBayC2chuRDEZhbQlli28DUzhG0g8bTz FSuEbSrx+uhHRgjbWmLGr4NsELaixJTuh+wLGNlXMYoWpxYX56YbGeulFmUmFxfn5+nlpZZs YgRG9sEtv3V3MK5+7XiIUYCDUYmHd8EOsRAh1sSy4srcQ4zSHCxK4ryLzs0LFhJITyxJzU5N LUgtii8qzUktPsTIxMEp1cDoO/1uVBCzmNoRkem2n27N8v+su/32rBgWVZcuqX+qZy2Li+8Y OX94uUSmej3Tuoti3xpLD3mXzT5/1jVylphfaso+2RgDme0nPcTK1kqqH7osc+TQgUuBIYe6 eV66LPh/fj1ntoVq5XuHPGnJB8rOTK9Waf1N3PuiYgVjjk3KtquMthwve+4rsRRnJBpqMRcV JwIATzsXNM0CAAA=
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/dJoOAOmhMzeAgufWmfdX-rRSVoA
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 01:36:35 -0700
Cc: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>, HIP <hipsec@ietf.org>, Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr, Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 12:34:04 -0000
2nd response - Gonzalo explained that Tom was already ok (and I should have seen this from below… not sure why I didn’t see the original e-mail). Anyway, I have cleared :-) Jari On 15 Sep 2014, at 14:37, Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi Tom (Henderson), > > Jari, Brian, and Ted still have discusses on this document. Could you > please summarize for each of them the status of this draft with respect > to their particular comments? > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > > > On 07/09/2014 2:17 PM, Tom Taylor wrote: >> I'm happy with the outcome. The list discussion addressed the issue. I >> believe the outcome is: "The plaintext attack is resistible, not a real >> problem, and need not be addressed in the document." >> >> Tom Taylor >> >> On 06/09/2014 11:37 AM, Tom Henderson wrote: >>> On 09/06/2014 08:25 AM, Ted Lemon wrote: >>>> It looks like the latest rev of 5201-bis does not address the gen-art >>>> review comments nor Francis Dupont's comments, and I haven't seen any >>>> follow-up discussion on Francis' comments. What do the authors >>>> believe the status of these two comment threads is? >>>> >>> >>> Ted, >>> >>> I believe that there is only one open issue left from the Gen-Art >>> review, regarding possible plaintext attacks: >>> >>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hip/trac/ticket/42 >>> >>> The list discussion on this issue leans against making any change; see >>> the last message of this thread: >>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec/current/msg03903.html >>> >>> I think I previously handled all of the other comments; if I missed any, >>> please point them out. >>> >>> I have tried to contact Francis a couple of times regarding >>> clarification of his comments and have not seen a reply. This is >>> tracked in issue: >>> >>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hip/trac/ticket/49 >>> >>> I'm cc'ing both Tom Taylor and Francis for any further clarifications. >>> >>> - Tom >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Hipsec mailing list >> Hipsec@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >> >
- [Hipsec] I-D Action: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5201-bis-1… internet-drafts
- [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Tom Henderson
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Ted Lemon
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Tom Henderson
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Tom Taylor
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Tom Henderson
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Jari Arkko
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Jari Arkko
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Miika Komu
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Tom Henderson
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Ted Lemon
- Re: [Hipsec] RFC5201-bis and RFC5202-bis status Gonzalo Camarillo