IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSEC] minutes part 2

Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Tue, 23 December 2008 19:22 UTC

Return-Path: <opsec-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: opsec-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-opsec-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76B853A6B31; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:22:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F7E73A6B31 for <opsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:22:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 ABvMyN62F1zo for <opsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:22:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74D503A67D0 for <opsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:22:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.11.143] (c-67-171-158-173.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.171.158.173]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id mBNJM3xF025168 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Dec 2008 19:22:03 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <49513A5B.7030307@bogus.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:22:03 -0800
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081119)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Glen Kent <glen.kent@gmail.com>
References: <EC3F7E1D-F7C8-484A-A0C0-1A25E79AD86E@extremenetworks.com> <92c950310812161620j7d8aaa16m553940edadbe6d8f@mail.gmail.com> <12201E12-8A0B-4FBE-95A9-5C8B23DA46EC@gmail.com> <92c950310812171704x76e374bbv1bd74d74f5ca755b@mail.gmail.com> <C2E84336-3E35-4D68-BD81-3E222CD681F2@gmail.com> <92c950310812180801i10ac5f07l4ed58c87778ca9ba@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <92c950310812180801i10ac5f07l4ed58c87778ca9ba@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.93.3/8795/Tue Dec 23 17:58:21 2008 on nagasaki.bogus.com
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Cc: opsec@ietf.org, R Atkinson <ran.atkinson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [OPSEC] minutes part 2
X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: opsec wg mailing list <opsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/opsec>
List-Post: <mailto:opsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: opsec-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: opsec-bounces@ietf.org

Glen Kent wrote:
>>> Its experimental. Lets leave it out of the discussion.
>> It is real and it is (IMHO) a whole lot better than anything
>> else we have -- and I understand at least one implementation
>> exists.  So we should include it in the discussion.
> 
> Is there any deployment of the same? Is the WG interested in this?

Just to be clear here... since the context disappeared some messages back...

RFC 2154 is what is being referred to here?

Do we have deployments or operational experience to draw on?

I note one of the original author's is a routine contributor to this list.

> Glen
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> OPSEC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
> 

_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
OPSEC@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email