[ippm] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-integrity-10.txt
Justin Iurman <justin.iurman@uliege.be> Wed, 07 August 2024 18:25 UTC
Return-Path: <justin.iurman@uliege.be>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C7AC14F749; Wed, 7 Aug 2024 11:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.405
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.405 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=uliege.be
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lnnfy0tQ-Dia; Wed, 7 Aug 2024 11:25:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be (serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be [139.165.32.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCCD1C14CEFF; Wed, 7 Aug 2024 11:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.58] (220.24-245-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be [81.245.24.220]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DFC4A200A8AF; Wed, 7 Aug 2024 20:24:55 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 serv108.segi.ulg.ac.be DFC4A200A8AF
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=uliege.be; s=ulg20190529; t=1723055095; bh=Q1mXMVB/tilu8AnZN2B6tbYJsF40eY419ew00cp/wZE=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:Cc:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=hXZEmUqFMLK9K2ezyrle79roba33hHzQ4R5PqqK59ql7b8sfnc3m0BRSubg9OntWw /SaC8LbFVVHtQ2gSlyjakZEEn8/53vxNisqPyBgIrMTeH+zgaGuN2qrz9JBFeBILk+ i4W9oiWDgJCCgCkG3dWLgc4ki/1f3WJOhKspA1yFv8FF43MSGWw6adTeAeQOQVlwBH V5jNPBocCfMRB9QA4dbMWH6x1meccNYJl15rJ2bDfIkZhRYKXpLkocMQrva+VrKz1R TzLdXUtqNFH++CxOMJYmi6L+yvG2opZZ18qwlfLkCqVz+H5aXJlGqBGEHCg5dgT9l3 amAmXyqPRbqJA==
Message-ID: <3f65ea47-8664-4e03-9aab-df11b6e77d94@uliege.be>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2024 20:24:55 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: ippm@ietf.org
References: <172305421802.1019309.14505270660717319193@dt-datatracker-6dd76c4557-2mkrj>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Justin Iurman <justin.iurman@uliege.be>
In-Reply-To: <172305421802.1019309.14505270660717319193@dt-datatracker-6dd76c4557-2mkrj>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID-Hash: N22WV6V7JFYTFXU3IKQAB3PVETTMRCG2
X-Message-ID-Hash: N22WV6V7JFYTFXU3IKQAB3PVETTMRCG2
X-MailFrom: justin.iurman@uliege.be
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ippm.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: IPPM Chairs <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [ippm] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-integrity-10.txt
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/JrImgC2Wmt9o_l56sHsKE0sfdS0>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ippm-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ippm-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ippm-leave@ietf.org>
Hi folks, This version (-10) fixes the last pending issue we had (the one presented in Vancouver). Therefore, the authors do believe this document is now ready for last call. Summary of the diff between -09 and -10: - the title is now "Integrity *Protection* of [...]" - moved the "nonce requirements" to its own (sub)section - fixed the wording issue (see above) - added more security considerations - and some editorial changes here and there Thanks, Justin On 8/7/24 20:10, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-integrity-10.txt is now available. It > is a work item of the IP Performance Measurement (IPPM) WG of the IETF. > > Title: Integrity Protection of In-situ OAM Data Fields > Authors: Frank Brockners > Shwetha Bhandari > Tal Mizrahi > Justin Iurman > Name: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-integrity-10.txt > Pages: 22 > Dates: 2024-08-07 > > Abstract: > > In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) records > operational and telemetry information in the packet while the packet > traverses a path in the network. IETF protocols require features > that can provide secure operation. This document describes the > integrity protection of IOAM-Data-Fields. > > The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-integrity/ > > There is also an HTMLized version available at: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-integrity-10 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-integrity-10 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at: > rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts > > > _______________________________________________ > ippm mailing list -- ippm@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to ippm-leave@ietf.org
- [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-inte… internet-drafts
- [ippm] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-… Justin Iurman