IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pcp] Comparison of PCP authentication

Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com> Thu, 09 August 2012 18:20 UTC

Return-Path: <hartmans@painless-security.com>
X-Original-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B68ED21F8750 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 11:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 2.259
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.259 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.029, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hlk9tjtJk-bN for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 11:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ec2-23-21-76-251.compute-1.amazonaws.com (ec2-23-21-227-93.compute-1.amazonaws.com [23.21.227.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4629C21F8755 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 11:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org [69.25.196.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "laptop", Issuer "laptop" (not verified)) by mail.suchdamage.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3C82201B6; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:20:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id D3E02420E; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 14:20:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com>
To: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
References: <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653B6EC381@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <7FE144CF-00E3-4451-8CBE-A6A684DB7CC4@yegin.org> <067d01cd73fd$765a6c50$630f44f0$@com> <D6D2DEED-C35A-45AB-8B72-96195C308DB9@yegin.org> <57FF0F8E-1B86-410F-8B6B-C4893A28222F@lilacglade.org> <BB72B80F-0622-4A5B-A985-79D8AED13E0B@apple.com> <003b01cd7587$a111b760$e3352620$@com> <15990E87-2D59-49B1-845C-2A4CB5A1FBD6@lilacglade.org> <008801cd758f$3fd306e0$bf7914a0$@com> <C72CBD9FE3CA604887B1B3F1D145D05E2CE65225@szxeml528-mbx.china.huawei.com> <028801cd75d6$c5765490$5062fdb0$@com> <tsla9y4gptp.fsf@mit.edu> <04c901cd7658$37a740c0$a6f5c240$@com>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 14:20:12 -0400
In-Reply-To: <04c901cd7658$37a740c0$a6f5c240$@com> (Dan Wing's message of "Thu, 9 Aug 2012 10:55:52 -0700")
Message-ID: <tslboikexlv.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: 'Margaret Wasserman' <mrw@lilacglade.org>, pcp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [pcp] Comparison of PCP authentication
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCP wg discussion list <pcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pcp>
List-Post: <mailto:pcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 18:20:18 -0000

>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com> writes:


    Dan> I am struggling to imagine a PCP client that would refuse to do
    Dan> MAP or PEER because its PCP server doesn't support
    Dan> authentication.

If I'm updating security policy on a firewall I want to be able to audit
whether that actually happened.
That requires authentication.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email