Re: [I2nsf] questions about draft-kim-i2nsf-security-management-architecture-01

["Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Linda,
Are you agreeing at merging our draft
(draft-kim-i2nsf-security-management-architecture-02)
into draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework-03?

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Paul

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:32 AM, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Linda,
> As a coauthor of this draft, I will answer your questions inline below.
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Linda Dunbar <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hyoungshick, et al,
>>
>>
>>
>> How would you position your draft-kim-i2nsf-security-management-architecture-01
>> with regard to the I2NSF framework draft? I find there are  a lot of
>> duplicated content to the I2nsf framework draft.
>>
>
>  [Paul] We would like to merge our draft into the i2nsf framework draft
>  because our draft has one depth more detailed architecture.
>  This detailed architecture will be helpful to implement the i2nsf
> framework.
>
>
>>
>> There are some differences,  such as the following: Are you trying to
>> define how “security policy” is structured?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>  [Paul] Our architecture allows an NSF to update a low-level policy and
> apply it to the related high-level policy
>  via the control path of Security Controller and Policy Collector (renamed
> Event Collector in version 02) in Figure 1
>  of our version 02:
>  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kim-i2nsf-security-
> management-architecture-02
>
>  For example, if an NSF of firewall detects a new DoS-attack host, it
> reports the updated blacklist having
>  the IP address of such a host to Application Logic in I2NSF Client via
> Security Controller and Event Collector.
>  Application Logic asks Policy Updater to disseminate the updated
> blacklist to the security controllers
>  under the administration of the same I2NSF Client.
>
>
>> Will the “High Level security management” eventually lead to Client
>> Facing Policy data models?
>>
>
>  [Paul] Yes, as explained above, the High-level security management leads
> to update and handle Client facing policy
>  data models.
>
>>
>>
>> Do you plan to define interfaces between all those components depicted in
>> Figure 1?  The interfaces between some of those components are not really
>> in the I2NSF WG current charter, such as “Security Policy Manager” <-> “NSF
>> Capability Manager”,  or the interface between “Application Logic” <->
>> “Policy Updater”.
>>
>
>  [Paul]  Yes, we have a plan to define such interfaces.
>
>
>>
>> Are those components in your current implementation? Is it like an
>> “example of one implementation”?
>>
>
>  [Paul] Though those components are not fully implemented yet in our
> implementation, my team at SKKU
>  will make implement those components in a later version.
>
>  Thanks for your clarification questions.
>
>  Best Regards,
>  Paul
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks, Linda
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> I2nsf mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ===========================
> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Software
> Sungkyunkwan University
> Office: [phone]
> Email: [e-mail], [e-mail]
> Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
> <http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php>
>



-- 
===========================
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: [phone]
Email: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
<http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php>