Re: [icnrg] [irsg] Review of "Architectural Considerations of ICN using Name Resolution Service"

Dirk Kutscher <ietf@dkutscher.net> Mon, 18 January 2021 09:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@dkutscher.net>
X-Original-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355093A1180; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 01:20:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 JYvXeTu8orWS; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 01:20:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.135]) (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 4EB593A117C; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 01:20:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.69] ([95.89.114.17]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue009 [212.227.15.167]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M2OEw-1l35fK2fd8-003wSb; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 10:20:00 +0100
From: "Dirk Kutscher" <ietf@dkutscher.net>
To: "Colin Perkins" <csp@csperkins.org>
Cc: "Christopher Wood" <caw@heapingbits.net>, draft-irtf-icnrg-nrsarch-considerations@ietf.org, icnrg@irtf.org
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 10:19:57 +0100
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673)
Message-ID: <4D9180E0-7A46-4696-A020-853EC7B97A88@dkutscher.net>
In-Reply-To: <3794AC60-E4AC-4CEC-B4D0-819DFAA97742@csperkins.org>
References: <18a6633f-53af-4fdb-b815-8708ec0344ee@www.fastmail.com> <3794AC60-E4AC-4CEC-B4D0-819DFAA97742@csperkins.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:O/V4geDpBXi8w2nGmRxnuKWxDL0zr2BanmqbAXvhimKkUWIcQ13 lQz7GDVnTyMj1ASBTC5XL9iz2EuKhmSphyu4RwQJMiUKTXcBqQ/e8lStp2w5Mgufc3pO2dD bEO0ko1AAfR5NcPzl+k//7dMHpVEqjmpa5VzuQaE5xfQyrIWrwa8S7V1X8VHlnxvn2XLzGs XdW1KPVp1rrqB5QUtMHsg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:qTgzIWpOOWM=:CEW4GXUJE8cT1heJCAGLJP lQ2Xtfj5FkXWky2sS2ahbNACrqN0Yo20HEfcHh/nOck09WG5NmrvruxYKWITUIc/8cfFxHmHG fL0b7VmJbtop7d1S5K7urCUSs5axKpyzJnXXLipmFMkvCnX5nvG9vk8ljEjXiH1hXydkJs5+t WifVXP/5GbgPB+ZMje7qGV6IwR1E5wnM/QHZ6pOJ2FOxWsJWCMksqWt/QRuoN1AnEwCnl/Xd+ BxG81pq8SQ8g90dazORFiTGiIZr2pg22PrW7glb78cpSfiy1D36YWZ1d6m4uyFAh84Cy8OJCX hjzJBuQrFW2HoscKux9zsil6Qo2Pe1l0/0IS019gEKnyRO3kOK3tYaKEmaxU0Q17ftGZhdYpf t9nfqLYviGQziuPF7suYolE2wBq3atXZta+kyXdrKP9qoClQpHPbu/Ezz0KTOHSsfMFmB6NnK Rs9ZzKqMJA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/icnrg/QsQ25q-ZKErAAtaik2IOb36Tg0M>
Subject: Re: [icnrg] [irsg] Review of "Architectural Considerations of ICN using Name Resolution Service"
X-BeenThere: icnrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Information-Centric Networking research group discussion list <icnrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/icnrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:icnrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 09:20:15 -0000

Thanks, Chris!

What do the authors think?

Dirk


On 15 Jan 2021, at 19:35, Colin Perkins wrote:

> Chris – Thank you for the review!
>
> It seems there’s some discussion, and possibly a revised draft, 
> needed to address these comments, before the draft can proceed in the 
> publication process.
>
> Colin
>
>
>> On 11 Jan 2021, at 14:54, Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Document: draft-irtf-icnrg-nrsarch-considerations-05
>>
>> The summary of the review is: Ready with issues
>>
>> Comments:
>>
>> Given that this is a considerations document for ICNRG, I think the 
>> level of detail is probably fine here. My biggest concern is the lack 
>> of discussion around NRS mapping management. The document states:
>>
>>   When an NRS is utilized in an ICN architecture, security threats 
>> may
>>   increase in various aspects...
>>
>> And then briefly describes "Name Space Management." It states that 
>> producer authentication is required, but I would like to see some 
>> more discussion there. In particular, is authentication required for 
>> only insertion into the NRS? What about updates or removal? 
>> (Something like BEAD [1] might help deal with deletion.)
>>
>> On a related topic, how do clients (resolvers) know if they received 
>> the most up-to-date version of an NRS mapping? Should these be stored 
>> in cacheable content objects, or in new protocol messages that are 
>> not cached? This relates to the discussion around mobility, and I'm 
>> not sure how much detail you want to add here. Maybe just mentioning 
>> the possibility of stale content as a consideration will suffice.
>>
>> Lastly, how a NRS impacts client behavior seems a bit unclear at the 
>> moment. This document seems to suggest that names can only map to 
>> other NDOs, and not, for example, prefixes. Should it be possible to 
>> query the NRS with a name prefix, and the NRS performs LPM to return 
>> the mapped value? What are the implications for clients if they can 
>> query by prefix? Should they always query the NRS before sending an 
>> interest for a name?
>>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Best,
>> Chris
>>
>> [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1512.07311.pdf
>
>
> -- 
> Colin Perkins
> https://csperkins.org/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> icnrg mailing list
> icnrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg