IETF Logo Mail Archive

[I2nsf] Will definitions related to "Attestation" to be added to I2NSF terminology draft? and the survey msg?

Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com> Thu, 18 May 2017 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E262C12EB1C; Thu, 18 May 2017 08:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ywvv7lH7bDsX; Thu, 18 May 2017 08:31:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 355FC12E03E; Thu, 18 May 2017 08:26:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DGW42530; Thu, 18 May 2017 15:26:00 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.39) by lhreml702-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.43) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 18 May 2017 16:25:59 +0100
Received: from SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.117]) by SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.229]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 18 May 2017 08:25:55 -0700
From: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
To: John Strassner <strazpdj@gmail.com>
CC: "draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology@ietf.org>, "i2nsf@ietf.org" <i2nsf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Will definitions related to "Attestation" to be added to I2NSF terminology draft? and the survey msg?
Thread-Index: AdLP6liVzeR0/ZtAQWOyVhhzwJRG7g==
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 15:25:55 +0000
Message-ID: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6592A1E68@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.192.11.140]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6592A1E68SJCEML702CHMchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020205.591DBD09.013D, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.4.117, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 3e07c89f4ebe8d62fa5accf67c8993b5
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/LjjSwdWlF7ARVCDnPRtF2b1Lx4s>
Subject: [I2nsf] Will definitions related to "Attestation" to be added to I2NSF terminology draft? and the survey msg?
X-BeenThere: i2nsf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "*I2NSF: Interface to Network Security Functions mailing list*" <i2nsf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2nsf>, <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2nsf/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2nsf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf>, <mailto:i2nsf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 15:31:34 -0000

John, Sue, Diego, Frank, and Henk,

During the I2NSF terminology discussion at I2NSF WG session in IETF98, there were some discussions on if terminologies related to Attestation need to be added to the terminology draft. Want to ask if there is any plan to add them.
The IETF 98 meeting notes also have the following:

- Need to explore metadata more (its use in netmod is not aligned with that of other SDOs)
- Need to explore Events
  - should we differentiate between event types (e.g., alarms vs. threshold crossings) or assume that all are equal?
  - how robust a definition is needed?
- Would like to see if terminology can help mismatch between info and data models

AI: start list email threads on the list of issues presented

Just checking if those issues will be addressed.

Thanks, Linda

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email