Re: [Lake] LoRaWAN use case; Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-lake-reqs-01

Göran Selander <goran.selander@ericsson.com> Mon, 06 April 2020 14:04 UTC

Return-Path: <goran.selander@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: lake@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lake@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AE813A041E for <lake@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 07:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.267
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.267 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.168, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com
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 5L6pl31sMQEg for <lake@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 07:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR03-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr30070.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.3.70]) (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 19B773A03FF for <lake@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 07:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Zi4E8EJq6+KamtuMBuBrYhb0VrRTbd1rWhRUYn7jmq14uI0jRcI01bn3nt0GJtVHpQUZX/HM8j5IWd+YMPSWt2WBPzXiPBQoUqGM0sNODcbijqBJ7RgI07h0T+JtDriRB3g3yloysgelXup1cuNdg90U/yMjQCccw4m3WX1Dv0cz1RUzQNaogFTigQfqPxJQYUrWfzO5jM7z69uh4XWBRs/Me1EMz7+4RK7ciMpUbf+APwMuYov1Gh/4bFTQTA99w2jerN6rN5hkFOmnBUT75TOpZ1dnLkhjCnwAq6GG0fXf4BhxBxwdduTmaEPr1wsHAs5oAUqCOOkkfJQ2tXm5+A==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=pa9iqT2Nwptr8ojYY4kdcahk0Qm3Hfg8urkYftn5Xa4=; b=hWIifeXCTLS4SzY0w8YUFT1Vcbnd91hSrmhZJgesMuC8/SG6JoqV1vP4fYwrAvpWPTASeCvuvF5lPRcZ/RCiDiXKJWuFV3Q8SpnTyBbiDL9EABO0vNvoHJ7FwLFmhquPiU/UBo5Oy9rBcY3c7rNVSLJNZ7B5mLj+IsaQBcS4wNyZvzTE7pJL/O6vrPlaB2YQb9I3ibglu9w0ohHICGh6SQ5Sw5e/gMxC39rr7CYVO5TNP/DmPqbWYhAYYUZj825DwJ/t2d4h2HoVd8F0NIG3kvcNOSWspOZn1KR4EVkV7elylLJ/b6LVBJNWENiSxt8jTSJ5+ZYS9PrTQ9HTajYRSA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=pa9iqT2Nwptr8ojYY4kdcahk0Qm3Hfg8urkYftn5Xa4=; b=LDd/LH2N1G7o4acLD1ZhDMHiz3RnU97RPp8JsnzeGZElI/ZidbHN6vck7JRxYuos0ikXQ6rLLoRQV9xkroHzt2hPZiki/t/KxgYvvRTaiLpCZc+eFwNDsBPHcCFSlJW4NOylLkFOjMP3z7gRWZeLgKtJJpya9EAmmWkzcYr/zeY=
Received: from VI1PR07MB5023.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.177.203.141) by VI1PR07MB6127.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.178.124.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2900.12; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:03:56 +0000
Received: from VI1PR07MB5023.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c9f8:d487:a0a2:81c0]) by VI1PR07MB5023.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::c9f8:d487:a0a2:81c0%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2878.014; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:03:56 +0000
From: =?utf-8?B?R8O2cmFuIFNlbGFuZGVy?= <goran.selander@ericsson.com>
To: "dominique.barthel@orange.com" <dominique.barthel@orange.com>
CC: "lake@ietf.org" <lake@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lake] LoRaWAN use case; Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-lake-reqs-01
Thread-Index: AQHWCCo55ekgv7JWHEuGVEPbCANb+qhkeJGA///owYCAAE5DAIABUvUAgAZHFAA=
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:03:56 +0000
Message-ID: <26A1D5F2-52AD-41EA-884B-F4E11B1C185A@ericsson.com>
References: <29734_1585730849_5E845521_29734_128_1_DAAA1C73.72FE4%dominique.barthel@orange.com> <B77992D8-230B-4CD4-A905-8A7D7AEE0884@ericsson.com> <27784_1585747918_5E8497CE_27784_494_1_DAAA597D.73034%dominique.barthel@orange.com> <28BF92FE-B0DC-4471-A4A4-C75BD2E5F03E@ericsson.com> <32275_1585754326_5E84B0D6_32275_32_1_DAAA7842.730FF%dominique.barthel@orange.com> <25933FC0-E0B8-43D0-A9F9-55AD11D7761F@ericsson.com> <22197_1585843918_5E860ECE_22197_124_1_DAAB6BB6.73184%dominique.barthel@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <22197_1585843918_5E860ECE_22197_124_1_DAAB6BB6.73184%dominique.barthel@orange.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=goran.selander@ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [192.176.1.85]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: dbaa7465-6616-4a86-d5d1-08d7da335902
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR07MB6127:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <VI1PR07MB61276D8715D3C01B90E44DCCF4C20@VI1PR07MB6127.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0365C0E14B
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:VI1PR07MB5023.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(10009020)(6029001)(4636009)(376002)(136003)(396003)(39860400002)(366004)(346002)(4326008)(36756003)(186003)(6512007)(5660300002)(66446008)(64756008)(66556008)(91956017)(76116006)(66946007)(33656002)(66574012)(66476007)(71200400001)(2616005)(26005)(6486002)(86362001)(2906002)(6506007)(8676002)(85182001)(478600001)(6916009)(53546011)(81156014)(81166006)(316002)(966005)(8936002)(85202003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ericsson.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 6xceWN4VJ3x4rR4QCeeOB1DeRPlTsSbC4IaIckcnKtF+zbcaPOAkDkbmFJbJqVvhWqMsn3IBrdtHL+iVdww0M8/j/CePNUU8HxjXZQjOrwxkzfmR3HOxOtUEKk2VmwJVzcXg/Oaj/IwbdfrAZVirqw==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_26A1D5F252AD41EA884BF4E11B1C185Aericssoncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: dbaa7465-6616-4a86-d5d1-08d7da335902
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Apr 2020 14:03:56.6850 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: UuArJGwKSmifxYX39cW8Yq4P4T7uAB0YPxDY1zocN9EOpxp+ZiKJFh0OzCIDW4i7TuqBKLo5orv8y8AzeWeBH1U1290z95wTTnyQkiNJrwE=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR07MB6127
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lake/JJZN4hwHZdKyEhTwiNF-QZeWdGY>
Subject: Re: [Lake] LoRaWAN use case; Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-lake-reqs-01
X-BeenThere: lake@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Lightweight Authenticated Key Exchange <lake.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lake>, <mailto:lake-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lake/>
List-Post: <mailto:lake@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lake-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lake>, <mailto:lake-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2020 14:04:03 -0000

Hi Dominique,

Sorry for slow response. Again, thanks very much for your input. We have updated the requirements document based on your comments:
https://github.com/lake-wg/reqs/commit/45ec2292

Please have a look and let us know if we have addressed your concerns. Responses inline.


From: "dominique.barthel@orange.com" <dominique.barthel@orange.com>
Date: Thursday, 2 April 2020 at 18:12
To: Göran Selander <goran.selander@ericsson.com>
Cc: "lake@ietf.org" <lake@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lake] LoRaWAN use case; Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-lake-reqs-01

Hello Göran, all

(not sure anymore how I should write my answer)

>So, the current benchmark and available data points are all compliant with your challenge.
The numbers you provide indeed seem pretty much inline with the challenge I proposed, and I'll keep checking them as the WG progresses.
However, lets not be said that my challenge mandates the solution you propose (3 flights and 1 message per packet at SF12).

[GS] Agreed. The purpose of the exercise was to show: (AKE in 3 flights and 1 message per packet at SF12) => (device-initiated AKE comply with the challenge) and (infrastructure-initiated AKE comply with the challenge).

In draft-ietf-lake-reqs-02, the justification for 3 flights is Section 2.10.4, which I find kind of hand-wavy. (e.g., one could provide a similarly-hand-wavy counter argument to the 2*60 bytes vs. 3*40 bytes discussion: a shorter frame is less likely to suffer collision).

[GS] Yes, the argumentation needed to be improved, see updated text.

My point starting this discussion was to mention the 1 hour delay step effect as a transmitter reaches 36 s of air-time, which is not accurately reflected in column G of your spreadsheet and in the requirements draft.

[GS] This legal requirement of the duty cycle is now in the draft. The spreadsheet is work in progress, see mails from Jesús on the LAKE mailing list.

> I think a benchmark should include all messages of the AKE and I would propose that we don’t formulate it in terms of uplink/downlink.
As much as I would love a general benchmark, I think LoRaWAN is very much an asymmetrical network and we need to acknowledge this fact.
I think it would do the LoRaWAN community a real service if we expressed the LAKE benchmark as two distinct cases : device-initiated AKE and infrastructure-initiated AKE. This would make it easier to map results onto real deployment cases.

[GS] This would be difficult to make more precise, e.g., since the infrastructure-initiated variant requires making assumptions about sizes of messages outside the AKE like the trigger message mentioned in the previous mail.  The content of the trigger messages further impacts the content and security properties of the AKE. What you request is perfectly reasonable degree of detail for the design phase when more information about the protocol is available and we should then make adjustments to the requirements if necessary when such more detailed estimates can be made. There are similar details when it comes to e.g. trade-offs between overhead and security properties that are not meaningful to detail at this stage. I hope you can agree that the current simplistic benchmark reasonably well captures your challenge.

Thanks
Göran