Re: [lisp] LISP Interworking: Proxy Egress Tunnel Routers

Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Mon, 21 September 2009 14:54 UTC

Return-Path: <hartmans@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FC3E3A67A3 for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 07:54:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.333
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.333 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.068, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1A8M2aL-+35S for <lisp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 07:54:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org [69.25.196.178]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C22D3A6AB8 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 07:54:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id 3E343413B; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 10:55:42 -0400 (EDT)
To: Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>
References: <20090919171820.746426BE628@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <tslskehmy16.fsf@mit.edu> <4AB78B30.1010303@firstpr.com.au>
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 10:55:42 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4AB78B30.1010303@firstpr.com.au> (Robin Whittle's message of "Tue\, 22 Sep 2009 00\:18\:24 +1000")
Message-ID: <tsly6o8cpox.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: lisp@ietf.org, Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [lisp] LISP Interworking: Proxy Egress Tunnel Routers
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 14:54:43 -0000

>>>>> "Robin" == Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au> writes:
8
    Robin> Hi Sam, Thanks for this.  Can you or anyone else point me
    Robin> to the RFCs or whatever which give guidance on discussing
    Robin> "business models" within an IETF WG?

Most of the restrictions would come from US anti-trust law.  I am not
qualified to give legal advice.  I do not know of specific IETF
policies that cover what is and is not acceptable in detail; if I need
help I'll consult Jari and the IESG.

I do think Joel's comments are quite helpful on this.

There's an additional factor Joel didn't cover that is important for
security.  Whith whom am I likely to have relationships?  For example
if I'm likely to have some sort of relationship with my EID provider,
it is probably reasonable that I'm going to need to set up a secret
used for map registers with that provider.  However if I'm going to be
communicating with parties with whom I have no prior relationship,
then assuming a shared secret or shared trust anchor may be a very
dubious assumption.