IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-04

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Wed, 23 July 2014 13:25 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAE421B2949 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:25:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 cUcRe9wN8XLT for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com (mail-lb0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 463191B2946 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:25:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id s7so890989lbd.22 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DY9Qnepg9JwwyoEgZ51g9TMKordH4cIJVCbpMi+11ao=; b=etcp52sXzS/vOYq6xT0/pXdaNvVXoGW9wmUECxlOXU+bLNWQlHRv1GhTXRlGSbJkwG bLO07QVYGkxZTbw/ApyMH+YyggjLzjt4wKHGgAMroahUznoLKo+yVpzkuRyJ4lgvT3DF KmdkVv9MsEI958DusTfm5vn9RImRuSO8X/JKryElLN2o/tfso/khVaE8c19FnFOf/Ev/ BrhK5GHr1Vt5FtQSOHOqnrecTSJ8A1BYN2eqXlLaYnC4LLg8YzibHh5VYHWR8P2B8OWe aRg9x3gA2OCsPRejujZfQXODmbhNJQQF6wHHeJt+xfw6LZoEk1ks8jibUt7/DBvyLHaa Ceuw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.205.35 with SMTP id ld3mr1545309lac.48.1406121949424; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.191.228 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 06:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C97C631B-1C45-4157-84F3-F049061F51C4@nominum.com>
References: <CFC8AC41.41E79%alissa@cooperw.in> <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF6287695E1@eusaamb107.ericsson.se> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93300396C7@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <63BA73CC-B475-4AD7-9EC3-5D6716060A8D@netapp.com> <C97C631B-1C45-4157-84F3-F049061F51C4@nominum.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 08:25:49 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcf2aCcmC3Cb0dOZ2veib8caa9HuYOOsmRGiNfrR=PTHFg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
To: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/L_z6TC6DBPQOvE8Oxx2r9PrwDPk
Cc: Internet Area <int-area@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for adoption of draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-04
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 13:25:52 -0000

Hi Ted,


On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
> On Jul 23, 2014, at 8:11 AM, Eggert, Lars <lars@netapp.com> wrote:
>> I wanted to repeat my comment from the meeting. Given that at least in my read of RFC6967, there exist to sane mechanism to even exchange host IDs across the network, I don't really see why INTAREA should spend any more time on this space.
>
> Lars, the end user definitely has a trust relationship with the ISP from whom they purchase service.   Typically they have a password that works for authentication, but additionally it's common practice to use the fact that a device is connected over a particular circuit as proof that the person using the device is allowed to use the services the ISP provides.   So I am puzzled as to why this problem seems intractable to you.
>
> As to which area ought to do this, that's obviously an open issue, since we don't even have a BoF yet.   This would certainly be a cross-area issue if the not-yet-existent working group finds that they cannot use existing technology to solve the problem.
>

Dirk (cc'ed) and I had a BoF proposal (called hiaps) for IETF 89 which
was on this issue but it was more concentrated on the emergency call
use case because of an Liaison Statement that was sent from ETSI to
IETF.I also cc'ed Bruno who was involved from ETSI side.

We had withdrawn that BoF request and since then the intention was
that Intarea would do this work.

Are you recommending on getting back to hiaps?

Regards,

Behcet
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email