Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-08: (with COMMENT)

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Tue, 30 October 2018 14:28 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F58129C6A; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 07:28:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.971
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.971 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.47, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 KDSTUCejN_VS; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 07:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3250E1293FB; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 07:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3602; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1540909721; x=1542119321; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=fyVm8T3k2n2mtwT8JRarOgkHrNLsU7T5Eloa5M2vdkE=; b=htb5SdxMo4uCMry+djdJV5Zu0VAnfiagTDZICQSWveEp6Qq29k96nbPQ PTw18q0vGm9A2Gw/Ns4DiIFgMGEhae5aJlgRf9Aqjc9qkXSdFZFD19gW5 w9bZIxDoUNYQoWcX/kc4doBa4wuiD6DbqB0q60cxBET5m9B2g6ycyLmQp w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ADAAA1athb/5tdJa1aCQ4LAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBAYFRBAEBAQEBCwGCBGZ/KAqDbIgYjBiCDZcgFIFmCwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BI4RJAheDDSI0DQ0BAwEBAgEBAm0cDIU6AQEBAwEjEUUQAgEIGAICJgICAjA?= =?us-ascii?q?VEAIEDgWDIQGBeQgPqFaBLoQ/QIUiBYELilwXggCBOB+CTIMbAgECAYEqAQg?= =?us-ascii?q?DBwEfF4JtMYImAoh9gWqUKQkChmmKHBiBUoR3iX+MdooJAhEUgSYdOGRYEQh?= =?us-ascii?q?wFWUBgkGCT4hKhQQ6bwGJKg8XgQiBHwEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,444,1534809600"; d="scan'208";a="473256097"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Oct 2018 14:28:13 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w9UESCht002640 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 30 Oct 2018 14:28:13 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 10:28:12 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Tue, 30 Oct 2018 10:28:12 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
CC: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>, "lsr-chairs@ietf.org" <lsr-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id@ietf.org>, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com>, "aretana.ietf@gmail.com" <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-08: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHUbF1j4UjYPcg/BUig1Pn6aaXdlKUv+vgAgAgjZgD//8J4gA==
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 14:28:12 +0000
Message-ID: <3D68100D-578B-416D-A7B7-AAE9DC3E9D40@cisco.com>
References: <154047014077.16281.149253858167058600.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <58B0C6F5-6153-4117-B214-176A9B68189C@cisco.com> <20181030140824.GS45914@kduck.kaduk.org>
In-Reply-To: <20181030140824.GS45914@kduck.kaduk.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.200]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <40A8BBCE96A1BA4D8438530C859C8D9A@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 64.101.220.152, xch-rtp-012.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/J-0xjh6nKUYH7k0e7RDjzyHjXXs>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-08: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 14:28:44 -0000

Hi Ben,

´╗┐On 10/30/18, 10:08 AM, "Benjamin Kaduk" <kaduk@mit.edu>; wrote:

    Hi Acee,
    
    On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 01:51:42PM +0000, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
    > Hi Ben, 
    > 
    > On 10/25/18, 8:22 AM, "Benjamin Kaduk" <kaduk@mit.edu>; wrote:
    > 
    >     Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
    >     draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-08: No Objection
    >     
    >     When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
    >     email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
    >     introductory paragraph, however.)
    >     
    >     
    >     Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
    >     for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
    >     
    >     
    >     The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
    >     https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id/
    >     
    >     
    >     
    >     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    >     COMMENT:
    >     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    >     
    >     Sending a new type of information to the peer usually involves a privacy
    >     considerations analysis.  I don't expect there to be anything worrisome
    >     here, but some text in the document indicating that the analysis has been
    >     done would be reassuring.
    > 
    > Can you suggest some text? I was thinking:
    
    I'm not sure that I could -- I don't have confidence that I understand the
    system well enough to frame something in a complete and correct way.
    
    >    Since the scope of the interface ID is limited to the advertising OSPF router 
    >    uniquely identifying links, there are no privacy concerns associated with its
    >    advertisement.
    
    I wonder if there is a step missing to link these together -- that the
    links are generally fixed and immobile, or that the scope of distribution
    is limited to a set of trusted peers, perhaps?

The point I'm making is that since the interface ID is only unique for the network device, it doesn't provide any clue as to the identity of the device owner or traffic transiting the device. Hence, there are no privacy considerations associated with extension. It is also true that routing peers are trusted but that is a moot point for this extension In the context of privacy. 

Thanks,
Acee 

    
    Sorry I can't be more helpful...
    
    -Benjamin