[ieee-ietf-coord] BoFs for IETF 105
Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Wed, 12 June 2019 18:46 UTC
Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: ieee-ietf-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ieee-ietf-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491681200FA for <ieee-ietf-coord@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:46:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 bTM8r5bWla-n for <ieee-ietf-coord@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADAFE120180 for <ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74AD0300A91 for <ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 14:27:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Ao6-ilx8TeAn for <ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 14:27:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.fios-router.home (unknown [138.88.156.37]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4384B3004A7 for <ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 14:27:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_18D370E8-6A9F-42B7-AC90-0E03DAAC6B3F"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Message-Id: <1CD7FECA-5483-497D-A694-4ABCD22B0904@vigilsec.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 14:46:35 -0400
To: "<ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org>" <ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ieee-ietf-coord/X_rgMFHSU_0PteYFKeicdoBRnD4>
Subject: [ieee-ietf-coord] BoFs for IETF 105
X-BeenThere: ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Management-level discussions between IEEE and IETF on topics of interest to both SDOs <ieee-ietf-coord.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ieee-ietf-coord>, <mailto:ieee-ietf-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ieee-ietf-coord/>
List-Post: <mailto:ieee-ietf-coord@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ieee-ietf-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieee-ietf-coord>, <mailto:ieee-ietf-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 18:46:50 -0000
The list of approved BoFs and descriptions can be found here: https://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/ Here is a brief summary... Applications and Real-Time ADD - Applications Using DoH - Discussions at the DoG WG and a side meeting at IETF104 suggest there appears to be significant interest in examining in the operational aspects of DoH deployment, particularly in operator and enterprise networks. This lead to the creation of the ADD mailing list where some of these issues have been discussed. The proposed BoF intends to establish if there are sufficient potential work items and enough interest at the IETF to justify the creation of a new Working Group which would focus on these topics. General NETRQMTS - IETF Meeting Network Requirements - NOT WG Forming - The IETF meeting network has a long history of pushing beyond the bounds of normal event networks. This BoF will gather community input on the network requirements for IETF meetings, including prioritization and the resource implications associated those requirements. Internet NONE Operations and Management MOPS - Media OPerationS - The purpose of this BoF is to highlight the many existing video activities that are leveraging IETF protocol work, identify gaps in IETF work and/or areas of incompatibility with video technology development efforts being carried out elsewhere, and identify a core group of IETF participants working on video activities across the IETF’s technology areas. Routing NONE Security CACAO - Collaborative Automated Course of Action Operations (CACAO) for Cyber Security - To defend against threat actors and their tactics, techniques, and procedures, organizations need to manually identify, create, and document prevention, mitigation, and remediation steps. These steps when grouped together into a course of action (COA) / playbook are used to protect systems, networks, data, and users. The problem is, once these steps have been created there is no standardized and structured way to document them, verify they were correctly executed, or easily share them across organizational boundaries and technology stacks. The intent is to charter a working group that will create a standard that implements the playbook model for cybersecurity operations. LAKE - Lightweight Authenticated Key Exchange - Constrained environments using OSCORE in network environments such as NB-IoT, 6TiSCH, and LoRaWAN need a 'lightweight' authenticated key exchange that enables forward security. 'Lightweight' refers to resource consumption, measured by bytes on the wire, wall-clock time to complete, or power consumption; and the the amount of new code required on end systems which already have an OSCORE stack. Transport LOOPS - Local Optimizations on Path Segments - Performance Enhancing Proxies (PEPs) have been used to improve performance over paths with links of varying quality, often peeking (and poking!) into the transport protocol. Encryption is putting an end to this practice. At the same time, more powerful network nodes are becoming available, making it more viable to trade processing power in network nodes against path quality. Transport protocols and their implementations are moving towards playing better with forwarding node functions such as ECN marking and AQM.
- [ieee-ietf-coord] BoFs for IETF 105 Russ Housley