IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Chris Elliott <chelliot@pobox.com> Mon, 12 July 2010 15:56 UTC

Return-Path: <chelliot@gmail.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 EC2E33A6897 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 dG6lV6jl8yXB for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D34F3A6407 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn38 with SMTP id 38so4997564iwn.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:reply-to:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=RdG+qtylL6VQ72Bi9eyaTRagAvYbyt7IlatUyJvNTeo=; b=lUk9z+LYs9cubmDxK6LbYI3EB33UWoLV0180MuFUO6ym7EgICkMQW1HD8OIgsV2NkR 7qPfhNPLTzyXbmmCGzy9uYJN0QhrF/W1p+BzHqGy6jpfJpgjda3zqIMugU4V3WVn4zXC ZSnq9z5J4+SugkQNWm9Cz/ydXxUXNcFYgmuRE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=BdSP4WT7GnTZ9tW/1kbBdqbZwsImsTECAvk1c88m/s58DvNChezNTYS8W9PxOshCl5 ZZUPiXYmbhxnypy5bXpp1wtP/3PdM8ikNe/KkCL86NFg7+pqeHCLUBLIEoqII5tobhN3 hpNZ9Cq2olUUpBEuNFXMfzHaS5gklCJHjh2Ao=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.170.79 with SMTP id c15mr14945217ibz.82.1278950194779; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: chelliot@gmail.com
Received: by 10.231.113.34 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTil357pxy8tD49Q9ds9QVlSjo9h3p3akSN9UF1XS@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CFB08C07-DE90-47BE-ADFF-FC72162BBFA1@daedelus.com> <4C2BBD51.2060605@ietf.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20100701070804.0c26b8a0@resistor.net> <6D6E25E2-057B-4591-9288-1283036D0374@cisco.com> <AANLkTinMFsrGyIy9bu5kzUiZqNmDbf7lpS-eht8h3hvP@mail.gmail.com> <CCD1D0AD-97DC-4CE0-9E27-CC75B5F47C54@muada.com> <AANLkTilVmeg2Tgjgllg2yT3Oc34Y4ZuwXwl9U1ELfjhc@mail.gmail.com> <20100706170631.GK25518@thunk.org> <AANLkTil357pxy8tD49Q9ds9QVlSjo9h3p3akSN9UF1XS@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 11:56:34 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3n3T8116Kd9-oQkB6V5uosMsttk
Message-ID: <AANLkTil0YIS9H-vYxIJJS_OC7tAlcCLQQycskFcLE71V@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Admission Control to the IETF 78 and IETF 79 Networks
From: Chris Elliott <chelliot@pobox.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0016e68f9dae0b969c048b32cc21"
Cc: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>, tytso@mit.edu, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: chelliot@pobox.com
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: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 15:56:28 -0000

Phillip,

In your earlier email, you state:

If the designers had actual brains instead of bits of liver strapped
> round their waist by dogbert then all that would be necessary to
> securely authenticate to the network is to give either the MAC address
> of the computer or the fingerprint of the cert.


Note that you say "either". Now you state:

Of course the MAC address is trivially forged. That is the function of
> the certificate.
>

Maybe you should check your waist.

Chris.


-- 
Chris Elliott
chelliot@pobox.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email