Re: Admission Control to the IETF 78 and IETF 79 Networks

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Thu, 01 July 2010 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6D073A6784 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 13:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.441
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.441 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.159, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WVmaVvL5GzO4 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 13:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE0C93A6359 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 13:21:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rmac.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1OUQGR-000Nrb-QL for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2010 20:21:40 +0000
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 05:21:38 +0900
Message-ID: <m2r5jnymul.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: IETF Disgust <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Admission Control to the IETF 78 and IETF 79 Networks
In-Reply-To: <E0A2F000-0506-4458-A378-7B07BFABE8BD@bbn.com>
References: <CFB08C07-DE90-47BE-ADFF-FC72162BBFA1@daedelus.com> <4C2BBD51.2060605@ietf.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20100701070804.0c26b8a0@resistor.net> <Pine.GSO.4.63.1007010835440.16481@pita.cisco.com> <3DC3D97D-BDCA-4731-AB0C-7802F45110C4@americafree.tv> <m2wrtfynqo.wl%randy@psg.com> <E0A2F000-0506-4458-A378-7B07BFABE8BD@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 20:21:29 -0000

the only hard issue i have heard is log access and retention.  it is
clear radius logs, the only logs being used (aside from landings and
take-offs of black helicopters), should be destroyed at the end of the
meeting.  but should they be wiped more frequently?  

their intended use is solely for debugging for users who have problems
authenticating.  will folk be happy with not being able to check
"yesterday it worked, today not?"  if so, ops can destroy them nightly
or more frequently.

note that the ops group has no direct need for logs.  it's the users who
we presume want any authentication problems which they might have to be
debuggable.

randy