Re: [manet] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Mon, 06 May 2019 02:01 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3072F120041 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 May 2019 19:01:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 WpSE9ZAGm6s1 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 May 2019 19:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gproxy3-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy3-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [69.89.30.42]) (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 BB3B1120092 for <manet@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 May 2019 19:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmgw11.unifiedlayer.com (unknown [10.9.0.11]) by gproxy3.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB1340883 for <manet@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 May 2019 19:42:32 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmsmtp with ESMTP id NSeGhAtgYVLCbNSeGhanPV; Sun, 05 May 2019 19:42:32 -0600
X-Authority-Reason: nr=8
X-Authority-Analysis: $(_cmae_reason
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=fvuHzqOMpUhrKo2v8qTgseqbDPBtWEnFWXTbyjO7ohw=; b=EK2RtAgf4/LrLz9OQ/1YHlA7Vd m66WItQcbZNzTREHzOENzTT36WSfyH4oBjLGtjy+6IfbXatE85DQviy7rmqy/M6hirqr8Ot1WRX/4 OI786ki4w/0qfcn0GOXavqDyo;
Received: from pool-72-66-11-201.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([72.66.11.201]:56620 helo=fs2.dc.labn.net) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1hNSeF-002DKH-PZ; Sun, 05 May 2019 19:42:31 -0600
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: manet@ietf.org, manet-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension@ietf.org
References: <155674321306.791.1391699664410908649.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Autocrypt: addr=lberger@labn.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBERW5dYBCAC1Bjgr/mVovBhi1rbqkowJShVtvLitNEGOTd6RtmwO7FPebg61J9+kRFTz 1wt869yiAjtQO1EtQs26QFTH5ZDZJU/LDAOzxTi12mpBic+AWI8W0yrB1C+KOZ0gw2p7Vnfj EKc3ohwkCICHTnZ3blO8Mslb4qHGxDm7Uy3luRjvH1ZDifuZvfFHcHVw2dJyGwLg2MhXCqpo OyUqFN0tlGqz1TOCAy3/IMG6OdNK27DGF5+vJyIqek/2xkIVDOLgzVCek3dARLqPP37W1Lx2 uXJUsgcJ7t7om5AEV2LTFrafvAvJbKLT9RZ0fgF4LXeRTIVlFXKkvYJFgygW+r4JCTvHABEB AAG0HUxvdSBCZXJnZXIgPGxiZXJnZXJAbGFibi5uZXQ+iQGHBBABAgBxBQJEVuXyMBSAAAAA ACAAB3ByZWZlcnJlZC1lbWFpbC1lbmNvZGluZ0BwZ3AuY29tcGdwbWltZQcLCQgHAwIKAhkB GRhsZGFwOi8va2V5c2VydmVyLnBncC5jb20FGwMAAAADFgIBBR4BAAAABBUICQoACgkQgbLN W8HBX9eB9QgAl8/lFnNh43at51P//sRX8cDg33C/biok8st8Fff0Y/6p+6HkYKQcxiuZuOLr HHtBFxTdMGfFrlJIFob/N6m92CwVwoTRZu8QIe68DLewd+72PIEzvlSy/iTq3e91XqfGWCE7 oqw7H/weJJlB7yzPWXra/BwgPD+WkTxUiKeG2F2HzBTQfBQ6VpHiMqW6AL0jcCh/Drya93ZA aAdWfW2ywVPqIKETZIk04SBsZCw9WESB2If/NqeZu/DNwBg4FsXCrfp3WfMSTkYmfT3zcU11 MpKcv20YUpG8Jf9lyMY1DgMHHdpUHdjo/fuLz4aVSQvt8EygRSzCxGWOWb89bUosAbkBDQRE VuXXAQgApBEy7m0+xMm4SEcQtFi/UQQqjVOllc2227M1ypbcEMRa46Tq6p0P5QBM9C9pxjAl tyI2m3hzvBxBJNnjknXTp875DGyj/yDwj9VeA18Tj9q6PRsJIxAnGKBgWO0yGdZLpsp0AN5n kMamxdVFGYojzUiwkPBayST6sEUp33o4xHsx99TA2bFxZRj6k0igWgdrPVq4qeEgD1l7Cl3f pj96owzm+7wecswAts2b545gfR4/V/Vx3VUebETR/LwMDecXokP5fiDAIRHhEUi/+FXcwg6w 6jtPilFcJ64HJP6P81OUdfeMDUxvSmbeRqXaZrbRN+hF6XfWODTKepsqPaX8TQARAQABiQEi BBgBAgAMBQJEVuXXBRsMAAAAAAoJEIGyzVvBwV/XUcMH/2eB6dvsP52su9KgaDHqsgPbxF21 AQL9oDCheN+AJKD3Eouj/d/MbQdsp/M/pjgTAqB3G4/rtoyJw+BDjnvZwdUe4HQ656IPZOub e10sOgq1taJQZtQIl+mWKURMGlIihScYeuGfi/1RzMqXeCcFW63n5POVG55FzU8B7DBwQ2oJ Zy7NL0YVbT0ROXGson6WHLhzGnVP8CjHq5TN5co/FH/2BntaQIdSaOmTqN+vy38KkRsYa3cx k9eTbP99ypebZclmw6kxlOZGl9DBp4qNkTn/7LgQ7iZNVyESs9rSE7hQXnmfM+C+TCpeZo62 8AwC5SYEqa5YlkpgsP0NIEMAIoU=
Message-ID: <669dc091-7ab6-db0b-f1a6-8f4d62faab73@labn.net>
Date: Sun, 5 May 2019 21:42:30 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <155674321306.791.1391699664410908649.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 72.66.11.201
X-Source-L: No
X-Exim-ID: 1hNSeF-002DKH-PZ
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-72-66-11-201.washdc.fios.verizon.net (fs2.dc.labn.net) [72.66.11.201]:56620
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 12
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Org: HG=bhcustomer;ORG=bluehost;
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/WCJljfX_nHCLWIIu_6iv9io3hQA>
Subject: Re: [manet] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 02:01:40 -0000

Hi,
	Please see below.

On 5/1/19 4:40 PM, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker wrote:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-06: Discuss
> 
> 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-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This extension (much like draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension) seems to
> provide a mechanism to direct a modem to drop traffic in an unauthenticated
> fashion -- for directly connected networks via the terminate action; and for
> multi-hop networks via the suppress action.
> 
> For example, per the mobile scenario in Section 4 of RFC8175, a compromised
> laptop in the switch could use this extension instruct the modem to drop
> packets without authentication.
> 
> I saw in Warren’s comment ballet on draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension
> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-pause-extension/ballot/)
> that
> 
> “Lou will add:
>   Implementations of the extension defined in this document MUST support
>    configuration of TLS usage, as describe in <xref target="RFC8175"/>,
>    in order to protect configurations where injection attacks are
>    possible, i.e., when the link between a modem and router is not
>    otherwise protected.”
> 
> I believe the same caveat is needed in this draft as they are enabling similar
> behavior.  Please correct me if I’m conflating the capabilities of this
> extension with the pause extension.
> 

On one hand I think it is reasonable to have the security sections match
between the two.  On the other, I think it really seems this IESG is
unhappy with the language  approved for 8175.  Given this, I'll go ahead
and add the requested test.


> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> A few questions and an editorial nit.
> 
> (1) Section 1.  Editorial.  There is a sentence fragment “example using.” which
> likely needs to be removed.
> 
> (2) Section 2.  Per “The use of the Multi-Hop Forwarding Extension SHOULD be
> configurable”, what is meant by configurable?
> 
> (3) Section 3.2.2 and 3.2.3.  The Terminate and Direct Connection messages are
> not supposed to be (MUST NO) be sent in a Session Update Message.  How should
> the modem behave if it receives one anyway?
> 

base DLEP 8175 resets a session on any type of parsing error. I'm
personally not a fan of this, but it *is* what RFC8175 says...

Thanks,
Lou

> 
> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> manet@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>