[Nsaas] 答复: Existing work, other things

Zongning <zongning@huawei.com> Tue, 12 August 2014 02:45 UTC

Return-Path: <zongning@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: nsaas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nsaas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB14D1A019B for <nsaas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -98.58
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-98.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 Ig5ABICP7D9m for <nsaas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 149FD1A0196 for <nsaas@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BLD13880; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 02:45:52 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.34) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 03:45:51 +0100
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.209]) by nkgeml403-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.34]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:45:46 +0800
From: Zongning <zongning@huawei.com>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>, "nsaas@ietf.org" <nsaas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Nsaas] Existing work, other things
Thread-Index: AQHPtdZHIyIdZ1WvB0S/i8dL+a9D05vMQqJg
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 02:45:45 +0000
Message-ID: <B0D29E0424F2DE47A0B36779EC666779661978DE@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <53E97DB5.3040106@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <53E97DB5.3040106@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.54]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nsaas/od102H-sqf4uuE0Ve-uFUFOfffE
Subject: [Nsaas] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogIEV4aXN0aW5nIHdvcmssIG90aGVyIHRoaW5n?= =?gb2312?b?cw==?=
X-BeenThere: nsaas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "*NSaaS: Network Security as a Service mailing list*" <nsaas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nsaas>, <mailto:nsaas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nsaas/>
List-Post: <mailto:nsaas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nsaas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsaas>, <mailto:nsaas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 02:45:55 -0000

Hi, Melinda,

I agree that clearly listing existing work in IETF and making a check list on gap would be very helpful for this initiative.
I guess Linda can post a brief summary of bar BoF discussion in Toronto to enlight us more...

Thanks.

-Ning

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Nsaas [mailto:nsaas-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Melinda Shore
发送时间: 2014年8月12日 10:37
收件人: nsaas@ietf.org
主题: [Nsaas] Existing work, other things

I was a little (okay, a lot) surprised to see this work proposed without referencing prior IETF work in this space, including (but not limited to) midcom, nsis, and pcp.
Ideally any new work proposed on this topic would include an explanation of why it would succeed where previous efforts haven't.  It's certainly possible that this might succeed where others have failed, but some explanation of why its proponents think this time things are different would be helpful.  Some discussion of what distinguishes "security" from other service functions would also be useful.

Also, the open source vs. standards discussion is overly argumentative and likely to produce more heat than light, and fails to acknowledge the complementary nature of the two types of effort.  We certainly do not need more unimplemented standards (see previous paragraph).

Melinda

_______________________________________________
Nsaas mailing list
Nsaas@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsaas