IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] 答复: Call for adoption (after draft rename) for Yang module draft

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sat, 23 November 2019 06:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572B312022D for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:36:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 SdVZ7XU0It1U for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:36:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:feae:de77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4AA012002E for <rats@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:36:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (unknown [89.248.140.12]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A566A1F450; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 06:36:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 07BD77D4; Sat, 23 Nov 2019 14:36:43 +0800 (+08)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>, "Xialiang (Frank, Network Standard & Patent Dept)" <frank.xialiang@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <C02846B1344F344EB4FAA6FA7AF481F13EA50B8E@dggemm511-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <147F9159-6055-4E55-ABDC-43DFE3498BF1@island-resort.com> <ce5f8206-74dc-36bb-0093-a93045d5c67f@sit.fraunhofer.de> <0A7E3A4F-8534-4E98-BCB7-1454E07699F4@island-resort.com> <C3AE2645-49C8-4313-BCED-02FEB576B614@cisco.com> <1C8A1884-A37D-45E3-8C11-2FC5A083B245@island-resort.com> <HE1PR0702MB375366C5F7FE5C497C35D73B8F740@HE1PR0702MB3753.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <7106C9D3-8ED1-419E-81F8-4CDA799BEDAE@intel.com> <MWHPR21MB07844F61BEFAE03F9E7DD290A3770@MWHPR21MB0784.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <6E7D64B4-2049-4D0A-ADC5-CA3F0647779B@island-resort.com> <MWHPR21MB07840B6CF7BEE0A11ABE54BFA3700@MWHPR21MB0784.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <20191117144129.llvg7fsrqgaqtgkn@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de> <MWHPR21MB0784B0111EADA4A9A6C766D0A34D0@MWHPR21MB0784.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <FADBA46B-5B70-4B21-A159-B22593310B53@island-resort.com> <5993.1574073238@dooku.sandelman.ca> <C02846B1344F344EB4FAA6FA7AF481F13EA50B8E@dggemm511-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Xialiang (Frank, Network Standard & Patent Dept)" <frank.xialiang@huawei.com> message dated "Mon, 18 Nov 2019 10:39:21 +0000."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 14:36:43 +0800
Message-ID: <10582.1574491003@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/3r0CCmryb74v4KLSuS7UqwsaSVg>
Subject: Re: [Rats] 答复: Call for adoption (after draft rename) for Yang module draft
X-BeenThere: rats@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Remote Attestation Procedures <rats.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rats/>
List-Post: <mailto:rats@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 06:36:43 -0000

"Xialiang (Frank, Network Standard & Patent Dept)" wrote:
    > Policy Enforcement Point or Policy Decision Point?

*I take the fifth*
(what? Singapore and Canada do not let me avoid testifying against myself?)

I think it could be either, but it depends upon the architecture of system/network.

    > -----邮件原件-----发件人: RATS [mailto:rats-bounces@ietf.org] 代表
    > Michael Richardson发送时间: 2019年11月18日 18:34收件人: rats@ietf.org主
    > 题: Re: [Rats] Call for adoption (after draft rename) for Yang module
    > draft


    >>> Case 1) The network notices anomalous traffic coming from a device
    >>> already on the network, which triggers a verifier to ask the device
    >>> to attest to its health (which may have changed since it was last
    >>> attested).  Here there might even be no Relying Party involved per
    >>> se.

    >>> Case 2) The network has not noticed anything odd, but wants to
    >>> proactively query a device anyway, e.g., because the network's
    >>> appraisal policy of what is considered trustworthy has just changed.
    >>> Again there might even be no Relying Party involved.

    > Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com> wrote:
    >> I would call the network the relying party. Attestation always has a
    >> relying party because there would be no point if no one cared (if a
    >> tree falls in a forest…)

    > I would be even more specific to say that the network's Policy
    > Enforcement Point is the relying party.


    > --
    > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -=
    > IPv6 IoT consulting =-



    > _______________________________________________ RATS mailing list
    > RATS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email