IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-impact-04: (with COMMENT)

Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> Thu, 22 October 2015 12:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 434FA1B3659 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable
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 C5W0XaD9BA67 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22e.google.com (mail-wi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 450271A90CD for <lisp@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:18:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicll6 with SMTP id ll6so116254670wic.1 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:18:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gigix_net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=E1eApblnV6HGD0E0RSQu/eBuaYFzYClHcwi2BYearO4=; b=esYb+Cv2i2fcjDIQHfZci8GrgP/+FojV7KyDI0gpzs5meivN3c9PCdDJYa9i0+zI4z ZTNLY2ZWamU0BjKGDrKOLEc6ovAyUL49+QeVvu777OYf/VzptYMeiVKJlUOZYqvq7pYp wRwGc3iryts2wNx9p7VITf2re0bDJa+KNKmUC5FXE2CjNJ70bpAeDDzW6fjgz5/nvy9t eALef3M3E58TdpR4ArDyQfSxk7QlbBRWm8f/se6S6bgAZCGUW5JJs2BeMhT0Qx6Rn270 UZFLK23r63e4LGcVgVgwZtD4rS7epW1YEZsWWf3BWZCo1ul5ExS9/y9TtUb4CU8CN+WN ofwg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=E1eApblnV6HGD0E0RSQu/eBuaYFzYClHcwi2BYearO4=; b=BeMyKLkBQ3x0XjrVEBrCP62aBtSUBWjUXNFj7DYLGO9uJx+MQ4vM0rQNBu+VbLQquR YSsQtQ2wulXMZTlNahiILzoyH29hMbeX/6oHEJxZAr3I5LEVquy+FCnlY2JgUKm/q1hA CrwHDEgdoFyCvewoH5Nck2hLaeeNEi2NaazQ49DLxTziIqMqyZo4ZEu+RZp3QuBSkFtO uJOpIbfOkXrrQm3RWquANOr9SOI3qDDfqU0qCvQzQJwHxnKTyF7Is0852Ixjed+d7Tq4 CSttAR6Km2wOf90wqQ7ANN5aomolA6GZgKj38j5IDKhKJMNWVz7Wi+Ya5VC/TNHxYQc+ UEdA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnK1tV4tF1s1cDbwDDRJ0BQJbA/eMcRHrkx3m1TO7l9wRKjNZ5nWHVxLmohZM8yEZ/fIFkv
X-Received: by 10.194.120.131 with SMTP id lc3mr16203784wjb.99.1445516296825; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:18:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:660:330f:38:2474:3be7:17eb:d933? ([2001:660:330f:38:2474:3be7:17eb:d933]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ka10sm16538536wjc.30.2015.10.22.05.18.15 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:18:15 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C058C936-2367-47AD-B184-F768107F42F4"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.1 \(3096.5\))
From: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-cUeK7uZNRVULys1JVtRWwvhEnBRpFxkmaf0TFHrh8NcA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 14:18:15 +0200
Message-Id: <59D384BE-38C6-4241-B84A-32F402080FBC@gigix.net>
References: <20151021164242.13296.32356.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <FB8ECFEA-6E9B-4D05-8CE9-A7D5E6078737@gigix.net> <CAKKJt-cUeK7uZNRVULys1JVtRWwvhEnBRpFxkmaf0TFHrh8NcA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3096.5)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/4hyT2BGF_Xg09VPwHNwKji6ZOCY>
Cc: lisp-chairs@ietf.org, "lisp@ietf.org" <lisp@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lisp-impact.all@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lisp-impact@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [lisp] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-impact-04: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:18:22 -0000

Hi Spencer,

> On 22 Oct 2015, at 14:11, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 

[snip]

> What is we out the following text:
> 
>         “Addresses are separated in two sets that have different semantics meanings”
> 
> Would that work?
> 
> Ah, I see - you weren't making the point I thought you were making. Your explanation was actually better than your proposed text, because it said "address SPACE", not just addresses. Perhaps "The address space is divided into two sets that have different semantic meanings"?
>  

Looks pretty good to me. Thanks.


> >
> 

[snip]
>  Middle boxes/filters:  because of encapsulation or encryption, the middle boxes may
>         not understand the traffic, which can cause them to drop
>         legitimate packets ([RFC7258]).
> 
> Would that work?
> 
> One of the nice security ADs may have a better read on this, but I'm thinking the point of citing RFC 7258 is that middleboxes being clueless will be increasingly common. Perhaps
> 
>  Middle boxes/filters:  because of increasingly common encryption as a response to pervasive monitoring ([RFC7258]), middle boxes are increasingly likely to be unable to understand encapsulated traffic, which can cause them to drop legitimate packets.
> 

Looks awesome to me. I’ll this text.
If any security ADs has further comments they are always welcome

ciao

L.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email