IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [homenet] routing protocol comparison document and hncp

"Michael Behringer (mbehring)" <mbehring@cisco.com> Tue, 03 March 2015 17:37 UTC

Return-Path: <mbehring@cisco.com>
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 864A21AC412 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 09:37:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 Hk4p33iZXmpD for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 09:37:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBAC21AC407 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 09:37:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2215; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1425404277; x=1426613877; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=sHOB+9m5PN4BAVTgs/L1XKF7a//xe1FHK/X9fxvazhc=; b=AAFWzOApiDtxn64/hE8IDCL/kshZIAQs3h//NlJ1AyaYvYYO+H4A3fa8 sU+srV5f9EDn+uEmKEPwtPhAmBYDymOMUxCaiBQE++X65ijRflYiT+HCL jd+7iBAA1cnyITaVItY2sqYzT28worXKjprV+TmgDOcYnxX4+y5p6HSKG k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0A5BgBj8PVU/4ENJK1agwJSWgS/FIImCoUnSQKBKE0BAQEBAQF8hA8BAQEDAQEBATc0EAcEAgEIDgMEAQEBChQJBycLFAkIAgQBEgiIHwgN1hwBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQETBIsShD04BoMRgRQFj3mdKCODbm+BRH8BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,682,1418083200"; d="scan'208";a="128522119"
Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 03 Mar 2015 17:37:56 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com [173.36.12.85]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t23HbuDh004013 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 3 Mar 2015 17:37:56 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([169.254.4.229]) by xhc-aln-x11.cisco.com ([173.36.12.85]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 3 Mar 2015 11:37:56 -0600
From: "Michael Behringer (mbehring)" <mbehring@cisco.com>
To: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>, "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [homenet] routing protocol comparison document and hncp
Thread-Index: AQHQVOUpWgLXkiEtcEC4I/K87EQnFZ0JjIYAgAANDgCAAAJeAIAABFiA///0XFCAAGcggIAABFYAgAAFLICAABMUAIAAT5wAgADGQYCAABruAIAAFBGAgAAKQ4D//571oA==
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 17:37:54 +0000
Message-ID: <3AA7118E69D7CD4BA3ECD5716BAF28DF22EE3844@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1503021452000.20507@uplift.swm.pp.se> <A782D466-C3D2-497F-A5C1-6ABD0CDBFB71@iki.fi> <3AA7118E69D7CD4BA3ECD5716BAF28DF22EE1EF9@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com> <54F4BC43.1090903@mtcc.com> <54F4BFE6.7020105@gmail.com> <54F4C43D.2020206@mtcc.com> <54F4D43E.1040508@gmail.com> <54F51706.7010103@mtcc.com> <2749579B-4D7F-4B0F-9ABC-8B15A81F713D@orandom.net> <54F5D3EC.2080307@mtcc.com> <20150303164345.GL98668@Space.Net> <54F5ED5D.9000402@mtcc.com>
In-Reply-To: <54F5ED5D.9000402@mtcc.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.55.238.132]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/Qy6K4bZb2tcoUwSQiPp4Umki8Hc>
Subject: Re: [homenet] routing protocol comparison document and hncp
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: Tue, 03 Mar 2015 17:37:58 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: homenet [mailto:homenet-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael
> Thomas
> Sent: 03 March 2015 18:20
> To: homenet@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [homenet] routing protocol comparison document and hncp
> 
> On 03/03/2015 08:43 AM, Gert Doering wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 07:31:56AM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
> >> Considering that provisioning personal certificates is the almost the
> >> polar opposite of zeroconf, the chances of the normal schlub seeing
> >> an informative and/or trustworthy name are really, really low.
> > You might want to entertain you reading
> >
> >    draft-behringer-homenet-trust-bootstrap
> >
> > which gives a good idea how this could work (the general ideas, maybe
> > not the specific implementation).
> >
> > Of course the normal end user is not going to ever look at or manually
> > generate a certificate.
> >
> >
> 
> I scanned this over (I think I've scanned Max's base doc too, but it's been a
> long time), and don't think that the problem at hand has much to do with
> needing a CA of any sort. Binding "human" names to cryptographic
> identities is fraught with trouble -- and if they're not intended to be human
> consumable, they might as well be the fingerprint of a public key.
> 
> The big question i have is whether the non-interactive nature of certs is
> being taken advantage of. For example, if I throw my root current CA in the
> trash what happens?
> 
> I have a lot of other questions, but I'm not sure whether this is right time to
> go through them.

There are lots of questions which we should discuss. To the above question, easiest case would be that you create a new root CA and re-enrol devices there. Not perfect, but probably acceptable in a homenet, if the enrolment process is easy (which I believe we can make it). 

Should we set up an informal meeting in Dallas to discuss this? Find a slot that works for most, a quiet corner, and discuss? 

Michael
 
> Mike
> 
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email