Re: [I2nsf] Will definitions related to "Attestation" to be added to I2NSF terminology draft? and the survey msg?
Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de> Fri, 19 May 2017 06:59 UTC
Return-Path: <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de>
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 4BCE7129C40; Thu, 18 May 2017 23:59:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 4BpX-2NgyAlo; Thu, 18 May 2017 23:59:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailext.sit.fraunhofer.de (mailext.sit.fraunhofer.de [141.12.72.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98271127F0E; Thu, 18 May 2017 23:55:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sit.fraunhofer.de (mail.sit.fraunhofer.de [141.12.84.171]) by mailext.sit.fraunhofer.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2ubuntu2.1) with ESMTP id v4J6smbw028525 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 19 May 2017 08:54:51 +0200
Received: from [10.150.178.111] (80.187.102.42) by mail.sit.fraunhofer.de (141.12.84.171) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Fri, 19 May 2017 08:54:43 +0200
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 08:54:45 +0200
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <CAJwYUrGcA+km=4QP=bE2AVpsnU2K9bJFaOLRTqQoRSvuhyXC=g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F6592A1E68@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com> <CAJwYUrGcA+km=4QP=bE2AVpsnU2K9bJFaOLRTqQoRSvuhyXC=g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----AEV4ZMQ5RH2EQW8V2SJCM3F35KSMJT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: John Strassner <strazpdj@gmail.com>, Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
CC: "draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-i2nsf-terminology@ietf.org>, "i2nsf@ietf.org" <i2nsf@ietf.org>
From: Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <6D26E7AF-9263-4788-9790-844199D6FB10@sit.fraunhofer.de>
X-Originating-IP: [80.187.102.42]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/T2Rc-LmrU2NRqLTs1wvQx2R_ONM>
Subject: Re: [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: Fri, 19 May 2017 06:59:31 -0000
Hi all, I am in layovers. Please wait for a more detailed reply. We will pull scattered around terminology definitions about attestation from various drafts, include Monty Wiseman from GE Global Research and Hannes Tschofenig from ARM as authors, and start a dedicated document on attestation terminology. Contributions are welcome, more detail soon. There will be a skeleton document in a github repo soon, correspondingly. Sincerely yours, Henk On May 18, 2017 6:10:01 PM GMT+02:00, John Strassner <strazpdj@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi Linda, > >I will start on these in the middle of next week. I am happy to >coordinate >the editing as usual; however, attestation will need input from Henk >and >Diego. > >regards, >John > >On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@huawei.com> >wrote: > >> 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 >> >> >> > > > >-- >regards, >John -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
- [I2nsf] Will definitions related to "Attestation"… Linda Dunbar
- Re: [I2nsf] Will definitions related to "Attestat… John Strassner
- Re: [I2nsf] Will definitions related to "Attestat… Henk Birkholz