Re: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de> Tue, 13 September 2005 21:44 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFIZh-0000tN-HD; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:44:21 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFIZf-0000sz-JY; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:44:19 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28600; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:44:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ia6f2.i.pppool.de ([85.73.166.242] helo=boskop.local) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EFIe8-0002Ge-PN; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 17:48:57 -0400
Received: by boskop.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 1E04A3FB7CE; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:44:07 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:44:07 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <20050913214407.GB11870@boskop.local>
Mail-Followup-To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, ietfdbh@comcast.net, david.kessens@nokia.com, 'IETF Discussion' <ietf@ietf.org>, isms@ietf.org, 'Eliot Lear' <lear@cisco.com>, iesg@ietf.org
References: <200509131506.j8DF664A016810@pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu> <tslhdcokeed.fsf@cz.mit.edu> <20050913204555.GA14153@boskop.local> <tslbr2wk78f.fsf@cz.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <tslbr2wk78f.fsf@cz.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f
Cc: david.kessens@nokia.com, isms@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, 'Eliot Lear' <lear@cisco.com>, ietfdbh@comcast.net, 'IETF Discussion' <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 05:06:40PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:

> I would support setting up port forwarding as a way to get a back
> channel; I would also support a facility to run an ssh protocol over
> ssh channel.
> 
> One advantage of both port forwarding and ssh over ssh is that they
> provide a much more consistent model for authentication and
> authorization of the request to "turn" than an explicit turn facility.

Can you please elaborate a bit? I am not sure I understand the idea
you seem to have in your mind...

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf