Re: [Int-area] Continuing the addressing discussion: what is an address anyway?

Jens Finkhaeuser <jens@interpeer.io> Mon, 07 March 2022 13:16 UTC

Return-Path: <jens@interpeer.io>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85D503A0F41 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 05:16:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=interpeer.io
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 ynZcbNrJG-U5 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 05:15:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-4323.proton.ch (mail-4323.proton.ch [185.70.43.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94B5C3A0F9D for <Int-area@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 05:15:59 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 13:15:53 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=interpeer.io; s=protonmail; t=1646658956; bh=eyICF77+kb/42UnOsrPHd9NOzFv7KSP79xZ4watUexo=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID; b=g2hYIHOfQIfaNdouPUU+GTsGmF7ji22+0HHYrHIMIvq3TLJw31QDNfQoja/N88gc5 CiS12eoVPB5v2pY0+3OBfMPgkK/yY+kO1WdmH8c0imGxCBK65Ovbe6J++BFT7OVfb8 D3cishmUKhlpQFmXrFsXnzq9rkK0EIF7D6w5RaWM=
To: Antoine FRESSANCOURT <antoine.fressancourt@huawei.com>
From: Jens Finkhaeuser <jens@interpeer.io>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, "Int-area@ietf.org" <Int-area@ietf.org>, Dirk Trossen <dirk.trossen=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Reply-To: Jens Finkhaeuser <jens@interpeer.io>
Message-ID: <QSUymagLlIuZ2p98VaEjXCPPiN8UwuhnXMHunroQSS6VtlSJnw9sY9ohmfmBPZ9VzPhSO5sG0SvQOrsRPOydYBMnB7mwK9sY7A9KuZt72oc=@interpeer.io>
In-Reply-To: <013c9f47a369418b9d8aacdf762df0e9@huawei.com>
References: <57c643c667d94a77b9917bb17dc142a5@huawei.com> <YiBhOKIK9bMqwx0a@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <385CF477-C876-482F-ADFE-DAAD6CA7BAEC@gmail.com> <YiH6iHwv+U9QFA06@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <499a3364-7ea5-4268-cce3-43f010f36a72@gmail.com> <Gpm-qFUmOVey9DYUJV6S_UNYb02p7ANbT8rEjy8JA54B__1YeX6Uny2E16uEg_o-R7v9CWPdDbyOgNW7nJyACAbx7Ok99Q-zad1EsgYBerc=@interpeer.io> <d128f1fc15824cae9012ab5f30358221@huawei.com> <6uJDmm2bhEUi36qYOVl6ATxQChEKP29xDlBGSJfyOeV2gNk5MbfYVt3CO_5m4S_Pj-OmZsZT5ayxBWYBfxyRjIEPCJTxarx69ML7dEWShcg=@interpeer.io> <013c9f47a369418b9d8aacdf762df0e9@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; boundary="------5ca1b53c757908d26c5298ab5981b35ddb833184877166ddb7b6a0bed516b933"; charset="utf-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/zaGDXW8RQwTjDKWt_qUfHiqT2mQ>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Continuing the addressing discussion: what is an address anyway?
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area WG 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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 13:16:07 -0000

Hi,

------- Original Message -------

On Monday, March 7th, 2022 at 14:00, Antoine FRESSANCOURT <antoine.fressancourt@huawei.com> wrote:

> [AFT] 3GPP provides a method to address this. Indeed, it allows bridging with other link layer technologies, termed “Non-3GPP access networks”. Wi-Fi for instance is seen as such a non-3GPP access technology, on which the 3GPP Authentication, authorization and accounting (AAA) infrastructure can be used.

That seems unlikely when the WiFi network is private.

The main use case for drone is any kind of situation where sending a person is less desirable; very often, these coincide with limited access to the public Internet. AAA concerns here must necessarily cover cases where centralized identity systems are inaccessible. My understanding is that "Non-3GPP access networks" do require this identity system.

It's also worth understanding that while the ground station authenticating the drone is of some interest, it is far more important for the drone to authenticate the ground station - verifying command & control instructions is safety critical, authenticating the drone is more of a DoS protection by comparison.

> [AFT] In my view, identifiers should not have a layer relevance, otherwise you can consider them as flat addresses. Yet, identifiers have a relevance with regards to the identity provider (the network operator in the SIM card’s case) and how open or willing he is to open APIs used in AAA operations for whichever layer or access technology used.

"Flat addresses" is exactly the kind of view of an identifier that's of interest here.

Jens