Re: [homenet] Comments requested for draft CER-ID

Ola Thoresen <olat@powertech.no> Mon, 27 October 2014 15:00 UTC

Return-Path: <olat@powertech.no>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52AA91ACCE3 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 08:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 xsRe2INfy5ew for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 08:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbra.powertech.no (zimbra-out.powertech.no [195.159.42.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3EE11A885E for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 08:00:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.powertech.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD307480076 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:00:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from zimbra.powertech.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.powertech.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id lvk57hzBMPQR for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:00:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.powertech.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF09F480647 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:00:42 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.powertech.no
Received: from zimbra.powertech.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.powertech.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id U_2JZrd-NtLO for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:00:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from zimbra.powertech.no (zimbra.powertech.no [195.159.198.162]) by zimbra.powertech.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6A2C480076 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:00:42 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:00:42 +0100
From: Ola Thoresen <olat@powertech.no>
To: homenet@ietf.org
Message-ID: <819511805.3231790.1414422042375.JavaMail.zimbra@zimbra.powertech.no>
In-Reply-To: <9C9AAA6C-61E0-4BAB-9BB4-DA02B74835FD@iki.fi>
References: <D0739ED2.D31D%m.kloberdans@cablelabs.com> <A06B0EA0-5817-4584-9010-776FC1CE1C90@iki.fi> <D073AA38.D326%m.kloberdans@cablelabs.com> <9C9AAA6C-61E0-4BAB-9BB4-DA02B74835FD@iki.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [195.159.6.21]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.6_GA_5922 (ZimbraWebClient - GC38 (Linux)/8.0.6_GA_5922)
Thread-Topic: Comments requested for draft CER-ID
Thread-Index: 3RlYsiMWAoHOVk4Opjf/lHX/rOyXHA==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/GGQbsO7w7admgZnaT80DknETIFQ
Subject: Re: [homenet] Comments requested for draft CER-ID
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 15:00:53 -0000

> On 27.10.2014, at 16.17, Michael Kloberdans <m.kloberdans@cablelabs.com>
> wrote:
> > All home routers should know their role; CER or IR.  The status of CER
> > places the burden of providing the firewall and NAPT as it was determined
> > to be the edge router.  The interior routers need to understand their role
> > and disable their firewall and NAPT abilities.  This is why the CER-ID is
> > a numeric value (indicating CER status) or a double colon (indicating IR
> > status).
> 
> I agree with that. However, I disagree with how you are doing it.
> 
> > In the case of the eRouter (combined cable modem and
> > router/switch/wireless), it performs a /48 check between the IA_NA and the
> > IA_PD ranges.  If the ISP sends a double colon or null in the CER-ID ORO,
> > AND if the IA_NA is in a different /48 than the given IA_PD, the eRouter
> > becomes the CER.  It must now declare to the IRs that it is the CER.  A
> > directly connected IR will see the CER value in the ORO and, in the
> > absence of another controlling protocol, disable its firewall and NAPT
> > functions.
> 
> Why cannot it determine it is CER by bits coming from particular type of
> plug? Cable modem plug looks different from ethernet/wireless? It would be
> much more secure that way.
> 


But that would not work if the router only has ethernet-ports - which is probably the case if the customer has various kinds of FTTH (many of these will use Fast/Gig-ethernet over copper for the last meters in to the CPE).

However I do agree that the suggested solution seems sub optimal.  It is way to easy for a misconfigured router to disable all local security (IE. turning off firewalling) without the network owners knowledge.

/Ola (T)