Re: [I2nsf] FW: Merged I2NSF problem statement and Use Case - draft-hares

"Susan Hares" <shares@ndzh.com> Mon, 21 December 2015 16:16 UTC

Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.com>
X-Original-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C9A61A909E for <i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:16:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.054
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.054 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=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 bQOPlzYvkJn7 for <i2nsf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:16:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (hhc-web3.hickoryhill-consulting.com [64.9.205.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D59D71A909C for <i2nsf@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 08:16:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=74.43.47.177;
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: "'Zarny, Myo'" <Myo.Zarny@gs.com>, i2nsf@ietf.org
References: <002701d13ac4$24025a30$6c070e90$@ndzh.com> <A3233753A4B65F43BCA1B64DA99A9C230809569C2F@GSCMAMP19EX.firmwide.corp.gs.com>
In-Reply-To: <A3233753A4B65F43BCA1B64DA99A9C230809569C2F@GSCMAMP19EX.firmwide.corp.gs.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 11:16:21 -0500
Message-ID: <00a901d13c0a$f1f06c60$d5d14520$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00AA_01D13BE1.091EF840"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQMPnHmelZuXAp4G2vd1mUXoIavDtgK+NI+jnELqCgA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/vcqhVp_AiREkHWDMLBVzb4_XUl8>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk, 'Linda Dunbar' <linda.dunbar@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [I2nsf] FW: Merged I2NSF problem statement and Use Case - draft-hares
X-BeenThere: i2nsf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 16:16:59 -0000

Myo:

 

Thank you for the comments.  I will work on a revision for sections 3.1.9
and 3.1.10 plus copy editing.  I’ll send a revision of 3.1.9 and 3.1.10 to
the list later today.  I’ll also read through the text again looking for
copy editing errors. 

 

Sue 

 

From: I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Zarny, Myo
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 11:00 AM
To: 'Susan Hares'; 'i2nsf@ietf.org'
Cc: 'adrian@olddog.co.uk'; 'Linda Dunbar'
Subject: Re: [I2nsf] FW: Merged I2NSF problem statement and Use Case -
draft-hares

 

Hi Sue,

 

Thanks very much for putting this together. It’s quite challenging to put
various threads together in a sensible order, which you’ve successfully
done. And far easier to nitpick, which I’ll do here.

 

A few comments:

·         Section 3.1.9 can be better worded.

o   Right now, it’s describing not just the requirements for DOTS controller
interfaces but also what to do about them. The text should describe why we
need standard interfaces for:

§  DOTS controllers to which external entities (such as NSFs or users) can
signal the need for DDOS mitigation, revoke mitigation policies, etc.

§  Network entities that will execute (implement/withdraw/get stats, etc.)
DDOS mitigation functions

o   It describes the mysterious “I2NSF Controller” which I think the
original author meant some network security controller. IMHO, I2NSF covers
the interfaces for DOTS controllers and NSFs (and anything in between.) This
draft shouldn’t prescribe how mitigation policies may be carried out.
(Policies may be executed through an intermediary like a “network security
controller” or by calling the NSFs themselves.)

·         A similar issue with Section 3.1.10. It speaks of a controller
distributing keys in the very first sentence. The need, as it does describe
later in the paragraph, is a standard interface to provision and distribute
the keys. Let’s not muddy waters by declaring who may invoke the said
interfaces. We should at least add “for example, a controller” or something
like that.

·         Section 3.3 describes the general need for standard interfaces
that could interpret [security] policies. Now, my understanding is that the
current I2NSF charter doesn’t really deal with policy interpretation beyond
the most basic. But it can probably stand as is now since it’s describing
the requirements.

·         Overall, we need to do a sweep of copy-editing (for typos,
grammar, etc.)

 

My two cents…

 

 

From: I2nsf [mailto:i2nsf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Susan Hares
Sent: 19 December 2015 8:17 PM
To: i2nsf@ietf.org
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk; 'Linda Dunbar'
Subject: [I2nsf] FW: Merged I2NSF problem statement and Use Case -
draft-hares

 

Sending this just to list. 

 

Sue 

From: Susan Hares [mailto:shares@ndzh.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2015 8:11 PM
To: 'i2nsf@ietf.org'
Cc: 'antonio.pastorperales@telefonica.com'; 'ldunbar@huawei.com';
'diego.r.lopez@telefonica.com'; 'myo.zarny@gs.com'; 'N.Leymann@telekom.de';
'michaelq@prime-tel.com'; 'mohamed.boucadair@orange.com';
'Christian.jacquenet@orange.com'; 'shaibalc@us-ignite.org';
'adrian@olddog.co.uk'; 'Kathleen Moriarty'
Subject: Merged I2NSF problem statement and Use Case - draft-hares

 

I2NSF folks and my co-authors: 

 

I have merged all the changes you suggested into Linda’s problem statement
and combined this with the use cases.  Please let me know if you have any
concerns or changes to the resulting document.   

 

If anyone was left off the Contributors section, would you please let me
know.  This document is the combination of lots of people’s hard work.  I
will upload it as  draft-hares-merged-i2nsf-problem-use-cases-00.txt along
with the XML on Sunday evening (12/20/2015) and then ask for WG adoption.
I’ll watch for comments in the next few weeks and revise the text. 

 

Does I2NSF have a github repository?  If so, we can put the XML there to
change it. 

 

Sue Hares