Re: [Int-area] Warren Kumari's Discuss on draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Warren,

I think I understand the issue you have with that bit of text. 
draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802 discusses a bunch of bcast/mcast 
management features that certain classes of APs provide. We have one 
example of this in the draft (and should point to 
draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802 for more examples). The problem 
is, that these features target specific protocols, i.e. ones that are 
standardized and worth paying attention to. The rest can only be dealt 
with by not rebroadcasting frames over the wireless medium. That is the 
best you can do. And it is done for performance reasons on networks such 
as the IETF meeting network, but I guess not for privacy reasons. All we 
really wanted to say was, that as a network administrator you can 
protect your users from the privacy risks described in the document, but 
you might affect certain applications, potentially rendering them 
useless. And we wanted it to be value-free because this in not a black 
and white thing in my personal opinion.

As a suggestion, we would add 
draft-mcbride-mboned-wifi-mcast-problem-statement and respective text. 
Since we already have the other draft in the document, we would point to 
the already implemented things in 
draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802, which really makes a good point 
for reusing IETF-specified protocols and not invent something new. Would 
that clear your discuss?

Best,

Rolf

Am 25.01.18 um 00:58 schrieb Warren Kumari:
> Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider-08: Discuss
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-intarea-broadcast-consider/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Sorry for the late DISCUSS. I'm likely to clear after discussions on the call
> tomorrow.
> 
> I'm somewhat surprised at how much this document glosses over the (sometimes
> extensive) broadcast/multicast twiddling that Access Points and similar do (a
> fair bit of discussion of which can be found in
> draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802 (which I think will be expiring) or
> draft-mcbride-mboned-wifi-mcast-problem-statement). Simply saying: "A feature
> not uncommonly found on access points e.g. is to filter broadcast and multicast
> traffic.  This will potentially break certain applications or some of their
> functionality but will also protect the users from potentially leaking
> sensitive information." seems to be shrugging off all of the privacy benefits
> (or possibly harms) that this might create.
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I found this sentence very confusing:
> " For one, non-standard  protocols will likely not receive operational
> attention and support in making them more secure such as e.g.  DHCP snooping
> does for DHCP because they typically are not documented. "   -- I know what it
> is trying to say, but I don't think it accomplishes what it intends to.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> Int-area@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
> 