[obscurity-interest] report on face-to-face 28 MAR 2011

Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com> Tue, 29 March 2011 15:46 UTC

Return-Path: <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
X-Original-To: obscurity-interest@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: obscurity-interest@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65BE03A697F for <obscurity-interest@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:46:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.651
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.275, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_72=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 GFSxF-dq3G+J for <obscurity-interest@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-px0-f182.google.com (mail-px0-f182.google.com [209.85.212.182]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77FF03A692D for <obscurity-interest@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pxi20 with SMTP id 20so73440pxi.27 for <obscurity-interest@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.150.34 with SMTP id x34mr3858001wfd.165.1301413692841; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.134.3 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:48:12 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=D_sUJzHyDx+12x2c742vN7JAj14XxVj=xFS7Z@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
To: obscurity-interest@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd28d68de1f15049fa0fc05
Subject: [obscurity-interest] report on face-to-face 28 MAR 2011
X-BeenThere: obscurity-interest@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of communications obscurity and real-time communications." <obscurity-interest.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/obscurity-interest>, <mailto:obscurity-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/obscurity-interest>
List-Post: <mailto:obscurity-interest@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:obscurity-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/obscurity-interest>, <mailto:obscurity-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:46:35 -0000

Marc, Michael, Martin and I had dinner last night. We met up with Phillip
later, and also chatted some with Hannes.

We seem to have consensus on a few points:

1) We should try to drive the widespread use of encryption.This makes
encrypted real-time channels (and other things that benefit from security)
stand out less than they otherwise might. The general principle is that good
network citizens, along with sharing the net gracefully, should help their
neighbors hide from attacks.

Along these lines, we'd like to encourage the IETF to NOT develop more
protocols with encrypted and unencrypted variants. Unless protocols NEED to
be unencyypted, they need to be protected. We should also encourage
deprecation of the current unencrypted variants.


everybody should look at the "tcpcrypt" draft. This has the potential to
opportunistically encrypt applications using TCP and nicely augments TCP
applications.It might be possible to do somethi'ng similar to do something
similsr for UDP.

2) The ietf-privacy list is a good forum for much of the discussion, and we
should participate there.


3) We feel a need for more tactical near-term action. We don't know what
yet. More discussion would be helpful.


There might be an opportunity to do SIP over RELOAD that we should look at.

--
Dean