Re: [Ideas] Fwd: Re: WG Review: IDentity Enabled Networks (ideas)

Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 05 October 2017 07:04 UTC

Return-Path: <padma.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ideas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ideas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C1B313336A; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 00:04:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 hyuLTyPVHfrw; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 00:04:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22b.google.com (mail-wm0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22b]) (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 6E968132D17; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 00:04:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id u138so155603wmu.5; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 00:04:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Haje3jl2eOptJj0z9ZNzqQRxLx+aJq9cBqD58734Fck=; b=lEE0LjFOeFSnptF8a3OnseulqFPTtWkaUdut9nqdfCmaX8alSxw4WOs9iJShKj8ZS/ N73oOhhO4kqOnbXuaz4hpPRn5SvK4qImXkG3d+VenAm8nMp0HhJvKej8DsyeCO7UOIcU 91xZ9S6sYTkg6Xq5XqYNFsLaFfC8evMiX0X9uVoDAzczFWgn+kdwbNcwcH9Ejq88v6Rm 6mpKJfoPl6msIYccV01s0G7ZjZ7mItc9EVjTjYXjvqFgs75smOmK2mhxozp2SZLspvb2 K1giu7O3L3QdmlLvoqLTMxcbmzYbd22jugy+qkZJzEDRCcVqajLcRXlRAkuffoy3s+e7 N0sA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Haje3jl2eOptJj0z9ZNzqQRxLx+aJq9cBqD58734Fck=; b=GI2IfsnuyIu4tI/2e6+mrJGdUXvAI+bu3mTLktag73ooj2Fwx/XjLX90zvoMJpmpfS w13MnjYWru50ELlxJtslf7IjyHR+wOFMsmKVdB4iyM+OQW+vF/4JKTfWzAaYWmygqAGl 6Fm/Z/DIM6HodfzM3hxTYCGj7l8VdT+pOj97a7FjTM93OwhPn5eVPw2AZzzGY6DVZI5+ /5KZ6qvrBuPly9PuI2nh4T1mJtARv71SHeCyD05Q5yOixEqN32KHpjSqxCM90MqDpH7v npC7NVm2XSf1TW5SIkaVV2qRWpI1JaPknu9nMaRBlTGoENEbka9AanVnMkIh16OnQE1e 6n1g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjv0MlqfumdxsGmtitfPem6ot/rRB5OoWN6hIxRzAvg3zU4ZH4K RqhIp7HxRPZZbsnvxnfbXL3GiCDx+Wu70cVdiPU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCfXUnCsBaeqqfsVm0B62rm5N32j9TKsBXU+U6YveDNLxTN6ZoQGEmh37Qc327AlEVZiNNLnRvIGnrPIDjvojE=
X-Received: by 10.28.141.1 with SMTP id p1mr15950371wmd.68.1507187090953; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 00:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.173.86 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 00:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <3c7810cb-8750-416a-d2ef-11b334c0b979@acm.org>
References: <b0c93bab-36c6-a445-ce1d-ca5fdde66ffa@huitema.net> <e476f817-580b-9083-48bb-72de1745f1c1@huitema.net> <3c7810cb-8750-416a-d2ef-11b334c0b979@acm.org>
From: Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 00:04:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAG-CQxqhGr4-Rqvpwt7uMd_jn231mHTE+7Lwoe3Hm5gFGnJw+A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org>
Cc: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, ideas@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11469d402a9adc055ac7577d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ideas/-4vFgjiU6Gvw9IanACoOCC8ydFw>
Subject: Re: [Ideas] Fwd: Re: WG Review: IDentity Enabled Networks (ideas)
X-BeenThere: ideas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions relating to the development, clarification, and implementation of control-plane infrastructures and functionalities in ID enabled networks." <ideas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ideas>, <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ideas/>
List-Post: <mailto:ideas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ideas>, <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 07:04:54 -0000

> I think there is also an aspect of "tracked by whom" which needs to be
> considered.
>
> <Padma> Perhaps it would be worthwhile to clarify this in the charter.


> Today a user is likely to have different concerns about being tracked by
> e.g., Facebook or Google when the are logged in the their account then
> being track by a 3rd party such as an ISP or nation state. In the same way
> an (industrial) IoT device might need to be tracked by the owner of that
> device, without it being trackable by a 3rd party.
>
> There might be an implicit assumption in the IDEAS work that there will be
> a globally id->loc database readable by all, the same way we think of the
> global DNS. But I think that this would be overly limiting and push us into
> a black or white privacy vs. functionality discussion.
>
>

> Elsewhere I see IETF protocols like EVPN which is used to advertise
> (factory assigned and permanent) Ethernet MAC addresses in BGP, which is
> global. However, the way that protocol is deployed the distribution of the
> EVPN routes are constrained (by BGP configuration) to the domain which
> should have access to such information. The notion of having a
> distribution/lookup/mapping technology which is capable of being global,
> i.e., not tied to technology, but where the information sharing is
> restricted by policy makes a lot of sense to me. This policy could be some
> notion of closed user groups.
>
> <Padma>
Yes the point was to restrict information to eavesdroppers or share with
need to know.


> Thus I think we should collectivity look at a combination of approaches
> which includes the MP-TCP-like locator agility with its privacy protection
> and also cryptographically strong identifiers in IDEAS with privacy
> protection designed in from day one.
>
> <Padma> Agree


> My 2 cents,
>    Erik
>
>
>