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

Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 08 October 2017 18:48 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 8C0901348F1; Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:48:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 AQoSTBtrQszO; Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x229.google.com (mail-wm0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::229]) (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 9E2CA1348F9; Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x229.google.com with SMTP id m72so17473783wmc.1; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 11:48:11 -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=xu/RdVIXgNJgKMikOTgzsQ0GI6xUvbIK60GqfjleTQI=; b=UP4GderlErdEpHHNc30Z0seJgtEjfdoUyuwQNtnYsw708lsuCHgU77wqn+3Nw9Io9L LZWe12jbqtpaQ9GngVYMj3/RDmkY7BjIEqloaHYNRg8Lw7gUmYXLqvcR/EsHc9KLMaEi pP1+VPq55wwQNC815oCdTiz/bmW+5dvOaFs68OhPkeo8CVtBLYYWCpt1knj1+uwAau6X cBVylWM95ESj/SWFBIThbS6YuC6xIk+MdWTfC21CmTnGmImMN8w6YYuzbGw+2b6LNnIZ 2Ar3vIGrPxBPHara2ULd4rb5gnTpLIisw7SAwLOT8RyDh2lcDYMy0/lqrN8AB0CesZ/N aCsQ==
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=xu/RdVIXgNJgKMikOTgzsQ0GI6xUvbIK60GqfjleTQI=; b=SgjLWmcDYZsNNp4f7DI5E4oh/lWldeKVq4I6GJhjJmpARw1ieapMYiiTT1juYCepD2 YuYq2o8pCkqHTWP8ae5TZfvA6y5Q/HPaRvo7mXAk+d60k3d+WjoWfbl5mcOpPmsjBk39 sYx7XruioNJOfl0NLbYnzi6Lsd5P+z4OKd560NoEoXdsB1EredIhWXZOtfGyFNU9ax9o IQBBYANsjxZG8DwaBXACt8dqh+CYzXwGcIa6n/VVyPTldwbUETXWG8rj2psmQhDSCBPq Xc5TrESnEuTh4Vhu5AjE61k3wXAG4HwQlM3XhlQCzWVVFcvrmcy2FxsegEQFPMufbdft YFoQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaUucceuQDYKFXKlMkmGkgypT+sEiZf2qaYhEN+eqFwXHI63KFO3 HnfSk4Vsn4TkjFpkRwl4Z0ysd/C8TNK+JDmWk9g=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBBWZo6YjrIpnxQvZZk7+0Oga/vatK7Ig3DCRMAB4H078GoTIuL3CnXjlzCEVfn4ifdJUN4qU/GYR+oBsowh4Q=
X-Received: by 10.28.13.135 with SMTP id 129mr6984679wmn.24.1507488490248; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 11:48:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.173.86 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20171008112206.1100fa88@elandnews.com>
References: <150670160872.14128.2758037992338326085.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20171007163002.11c897a0@elandnews.com> <CAG-CQxpnHKtov+pj6YFL0wxnO3YX7mbLUA9uHUkVQbHqE3A1rQ@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20171008102541.11499408@elandnews.com> <CAG-CQxpEb8Lcjy0M5445K4Ob+nQW15WeEooggcxpb=hToB4HZw@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20171008112206.1100fa88@elandnews.com>
From: Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 11:48:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CAG-CQxo06CC-+sBAZuDeB8gy6cBMtCuFiXvPC60Fdp93QwX6qA@mail.gmail.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, ideas@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11443e74f6dd58055b0d838a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ideas/PKUtBDJE9OvVMCuHCAdohwuZWAc>
Subject: Re: [Ideas] 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: Sun, 08 Oct 2017 18:48:18 -0000

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 11:33 AM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

> Hi Padma,
> At 11:20 AM 08-10-2017, Padma Pillay-Esnault wrote:
>
>> There is even text in the charter regarding this.
>>
>> - Analysis of the concepts of identity-identifier split and dynamic
>> identifier changes, including their implications on anonymity and privacy.
>> Explicitly, the framework must define privacy requirements and how
>> potential extensions/solutions should meet them.
>>
>
> Why is privacy requirements being redefined?  The IAB already has a RFC
> about that.  I have not done a search; there are probably IETF RFCs about
> that subject.


It looks like you are referring to general privacy requirements but this is
not the scope/context of this work.

The charter only refers to the context of the framework requirements.


>
> ?? Not sure what /how this is in context .... Are we still taking about
>> routing information here?
>>
>
> No.


this work is in the context of routing information only.

>
>
> Can you clarify what you mean here by maintenance work on IPv4 technical
>> specification? Again the context here is a mapping system infrastructure to
>> be used by Id/Loc protocols.
>>
>
> There is currently an IETF thread about that [1].


> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
> 1. https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg104717.html
>


No.

Padma