Re: [IPsec] Proposed charter text

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Fri, 16 February 2018 19:59 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 881BD128896 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:59:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 44D817RfyfHa for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:59:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (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 4F2291200C1 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:59:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3zjkWN6P3Jz4Cc; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:59:44 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1518811184; bh=lbBVDK/luZKOZh65kV+5BNEiUPUXgr4eN2QDNibcYaA=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=WJW2Y+gp/d22RJpEh2PDFECxa4Zv4rrmotrCAjrEjVUCHMMm3HbxQyanPORT5TsFS ogMKnNVIGPSpTNCzABI53zvA8eQljbAXKCevXUl4Jjj1gDWV1NxQL++ZE5/Kna0nLd OROvyGnUkS3z7JNMikGhNJejsixDB3PYEtfEnn4I=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6_T6nCVNNEmk; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:59:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (vpn.nohats.ca [193.110.157.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:59:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9889330B3EC; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 14:59:41 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bofh.nohats.ca 9889330B3EC
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9168E411ED37; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 14:59:41 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 14:59:41 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>
cc: ipsec@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <23175.6913.726475.284090@fireball.acr.fi>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1802161453320.23713@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <23175.6913.726475.284090@fireball.acr.fi>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/bADoyFOvN1FAYB9Zfp4lfoIdRl4>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Proposed charter text
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 19:59:49 -0000

On Fri, 16 Feb 2018, Tero Kivinen wrote:

> The IPsec suite of protocols includes IKEv1 (RFC 2409 and associated
> RFCs, IKEv1 is now obsoleted), IKEv2 (RFC 7296), and the IPsec
> security architecture (RFC 4301). IPsec is widely deployed in VPN
> gateways, VPN remote access clients, and as a substrate for
> host-to-host, host-to-network, and network-to-network security.

Can we add "mesh" to this, eg:

 	and as a substrate for host-to-host, host-to-network,
 	network-to-network and mesh security.

> Postquantum cryptography for IKEv2 (new)
>
>    Postquantum Cryptography brings new key exchange methods. Most of
>    these methods that are known to date have much larger public keys
>    then conventional Diffie-Hellman public keys. Direct using these
>    methods in IKEv2 might lead to a number of problems due to the
>    increased size of initial IKEv2 messages. The working group will
>    analyze the possible problems and develop a solution, that will
>    make adding Postquantum key exchange methods more easy. The
>    solution will allow post quantum key exchange to be performed in
>    parallel with (or instead of) the existing Diffie-Hellman key
>    exchange.

I think "develop a solution" is a bit too strong here. I think we are
really "developing experiments to gain operational experience" and in
a latter stage "focus on providing a single solution".

I'm fine with all other charter items listed.

Paul