Re: [multipathtcp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 14 September 2016 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9331312B35B; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.809
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.809 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.508, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 UpnTn8gUEj9s; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 113EA12B1E0; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:34:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D90BE56; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:34:08 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JOwIrbATYezL; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:34:08 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.93] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.93]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56294BE4C; Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:34:08 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1473867248; bh=Dm48hYEgb7aT+eP43oXRkMq9xKxzbliCxyMTyd1HV8A=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=231hJ77TFK1d0VZ5Zy50m+Fzo/lrNfX/GJHPK7oYIM8BExNw0Cr2/IannfQ1IE1tm eSutx++wqs7MG7ld5F0b2gpFo2MHyFTEkhxZ6kMy7ATjSYJyst9whpnVW2QeR+yqPf yEpV0oI9RGgLuMacc9HnuQ0BaO+vR2t1N84mdaas=
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Mirja_K=c3=bchlewind?= <ietf@kuehlewind.net>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <147385003530.1966.83385935910172454.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <e40ea11b-a44c-8d73-fcf6-9652a708ff1b@kuehlewind.net>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <a914b74f-efab-8f01-3177-cdecd70ad0d2@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:34:08 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e40ea11b-a44c-8d73-fcf6-9652a708ff1b@kuehlewind.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="------------ms060807080603040009090705"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/8Kw532iip9od9pt5xpGAFI1RurQ>
Cc: multipathtcp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mptcp-experience@ietf.org, mptcp-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <multipathtcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/multipathtcp/>
List-Post: <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 15:55:15 -0000


On 14/09/16 16:25, Mirja Kühlewind wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> actually the answer might be 'no'. But I guess the reason why they don't
> talk about it, is because we don't have any reports here.

Hmm, it seems that scholar at least has some references
to stuff [1]. I've no clue if those're useful or not
though - did anyone go looking? Be a shame to not include
some if they were useful/relevant.

Ta,
S.

[1]
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2015&q=MPTCP+security&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

> 
> Mirja
> 
> 
> On 14.09.2016 12:47, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>> Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: 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-mptcp-experience/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> I was a bit sad that there was no reporting of
>> experiences with the security aspects of MPTCP.  Have
>> we really learned nothing worth saying about that?
>> Have we really seen no attacks on, or tailored to,
>> MPTCP? It seems odd that the answer to both questions
>> is "no."
>>
>>