IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pidloc] PIdLoc Webex

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Tue, 04 December 2018 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pidloc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pidloc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 690F4130F27 for <pidloc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 08:54:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 oCz_FXKPD7zH for <pidloc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 08:53:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x630.google.com (mail-pl1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::630]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E24F3130F35 for <pidloc@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 08:53:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x630.google.com with SMTP id b5so8594505plr.4 for <pidloc@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 08:53:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=0jB8CTavDX3/Jljrequ66Ah+SqTxZyFd1c6YNE4zx94=; b=jUi+pKMczVJWnhFYdALDVTg+PNBznJwn1I8GDLVH7SkK/DlSjA6s4dlVQvZd75LZKC QSstZxkbBaa4gYS84ULlnZYp1lmTYTxHsCdBaoHfaO5EaV5H+sHUntcPZhryfLsNXWQO i77ns13Rs/+5uSRMDtOAl9SBMNR+09SgGw13TcwxpViWLHQAjooCnPlmgNRB3yPBiSoV Q/hurUK3SlLB0r/iDhFSInVP9X6U32xHy0ghTwdOm9tOU6zrD7cXGmn3/pxq/5qzvgDt ju/RJqL05kmI7NUgS2Uj4ygx5CpAFpV6+OVjx7f7ldWYTRIPa9ZwC+kjOkeFpJ6zeY3F A0tQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=0jB8CTavDX3/Jljrequ66Ah+SqTxZyFd1c6YNE4zx94=; b=IBAvxKx5NvJ9OX/B0thu7ph4nrhKe6v90b3v2KHv18gQgJlA6KvYkMPdDnYfGRv7bg I0+7UU7WACI93Gh1AMhxK0qqNBttSFQXfH3tupJNRhgQvDfjlPJMhStV10N9A09oT5hM Kzx4rGTjHMzDp79KBkv+gZVxwbOClbSBOPY6ZsiF0x2+KqvRtoV7oc9UyeQkb6MZ4s0L 3sZ0wyEY8MKXqlupfKg/dE82hMfiQ0/uAtprQVrv+klCSUkUVCtNv49iSKjsdvwN/3mA uA9LrkjDbEM1Zoxjk9wVcGyhl9J7/dVqdTPfvrTf+ZpnYBGD8ruacIRoRVAFhZy9kZLy 5e/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWZT1DhWyyoCTiMbhYr7AOoZebe7aCvis/sv3ltO6AGXvRryoxsl cqV5pTYB5YMvsj+0VqP3XA4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/Wt94172f7R++dI4mw6YcZ55zDhkRAfqfgPln2vkzWeh3O8K5LrwnUkqqD8ohkGeaNDS4CPcA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:bd86:: with SMTP id q6mr20115653pls.16.1543942438401; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 08:53:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.31.79.42] ([96.72.181.209]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z7sm31806213pga.6.2018.12.04.08.53.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Dec 2018 08:53:57 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <FRAPR01MB080121A9C90A6F78BBD7E4B7D1AF0@FRAPR01MB0801.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 08:53:56 -0800
Cc: rja.lists@gmail.com, Saleem Bhatti <saleem@st-andrews.ac.uk>, Shunsuke Homma <homma.shunsuke@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org>, Tom Herbert <tom@quantonium.net>, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>, Erik Nordmark <erik@zededa.com>, pidloc@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <95C0EB99-9A1F-4650-B764-2CC923B879A2@gmail.com>
References: <FRAPR01MB0801A22EEC0D55414EFFEC2ED1D00@FRAPR01MB0801.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE> <FRAPR01MB0801CDFD28647B7A02D700D2D1D00@FRAPR01MB0801.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE> <FRAPR01MB0801A452C8111F16940D4D65D1D10@FRAPR01MB0801.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE> <FRAPR01MB080121A9C90A6F78BBD7E4B7D1AF0@FRAPR01MB0801.DEUPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.DE>
To: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pidloc/4pw1xkZqGpOqi-kd6iCeoAZfNLA>
Subject: Re: [Pidloc] PIdLoc Webex
X-BeenThere: pidloc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <pidloc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pidloc>, <mailto:pidloc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pidloc/>
List-Post: <mailto:pidloc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pidloc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pidloc>, <mailto:pidloc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 16:54:01 -0000

> Questioned explicitly by Dirk Luigi pointed out that LISP so far has not dealt with privacy problem but secured content by encryption and protected mapping request from attacks

This is a broad statement. Can someone be more specific. 

If DTLS is used for LISP protocol messages and LISP-crypto is used for encapsulation than both the LISP control-plane and data-plane support privacy. Note that if you don’t use DTLS, one can send control-plane messages over LISP-crypto. So the architecture can support privacy.

Dino

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email