IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de> Wed, 06 November 2019 20:11 UTC

Return-Path: <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de>
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 7CC291200A4 for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:11:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 VhEqGCHWCkAA for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:11:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailext.sit.fraunhofer.de (mailext.sit.fraunhofer.de [141.12.72.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37277120058 for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:11:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sit.fraunhofer.de (mail.sit.fraunhofer.de [141.12.84.171]) by mailext.sit.fraunhofer.de (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-10) with ESMTPS id xA6KB4WY020176 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:11:05 +0100
Received: from [192.168.178.8] (134.102.43.219) by mail.sit.fraunhofer.de (141.12.84.171) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.468.0; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 21:10:59 +0100
To: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>, "Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing)" <ncamwing@cisco.com>
CC: "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>
References: <8B173958-FC2A-4D1D-A81C-F324AB632CD7@cisco.com> <147F9159-6055-4E55-ABDC-43DFE3498BF1@island-resort.com>
From: Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de>
Message-ID: <ce5f8206-74dc-36bb-0093-a93045d5c67f@sit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 21:10:58 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <147F9159-6055-4E55-ABDC-43DFE3498BF1@island-resort.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [134.102.43.219]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/lCnNHv0LoBy9o1_Mf1YtI9VTyQE>
Subject: Re: [Rats] 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: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 20:11:13 -0000

And bad sequence of replies, too...

Does that have an impact on the title? I think it does not. Laurence?

Viele Grüße,

Henk

On 06.11.19 20:44, Laurence Lundblade wrote:
> I think we have accepted that this WG will do standardization for / 
> around the following attestation token formats (aka attestation evidence 
> formats):
> 
>   * EAT (lots of detailed work in IETF to define)
>       o JWT
>       o CWT
>       o (possibly also ASN.1 / X.509)
>   * TCG (fixed years ago by the TCG)
>       o TPM 1.2 signed Quote
>       o TPM 2 signed Audit Session
> 
> 
> I think any conveyance protocol we work on MUST carry all of these. I 
> don’t think this is hard. If it were hard I wouldn’t say this.
> 
> To adopt the YANG module, I think it should be modified to carry 
> EAT/JWT/CWT and retain its name. It can still have the other 
> TPM-specific stuff in it for use when in TPM mode, but it should have an 
> EAT mode too.
> 
> LL
> 
> 
>> On Nov 5, 2019, at 2:54 PM, Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing) 
>> <ncamwing@cisco.com <mailto:ncamwing@cisco.com>> wrote:
>>
>> All,
>> Thanks for the feedback and responses received thus far on 
>> thehttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-birkholz-rats-basic-yang-module/
>> draft.
>> There  was consensus that the focus of the draft is more about TPM 
>> based attestations so the draft should be modified accordingly.  A 
>> suggested title would be “Yang Module for TPM based Remote 
>> Attestations”, the file, once adopted, would be renamed to draf 
>> -rats-tpm-yang-module
>> With this proposed update, this is a call for adoption for that draft 
>> with the modified name.  We would like to close the confirmation by 
>> the Friday of the IETF 106, e.g. Friday Nov 22 EOD (IETF time).  If 
>> you have objections on adopting the draft, please state your rationale 
>> as well.
>> Warm regards,
>>                 Nancy
>> _______________________________________________
>> RATS mailing list
>> RATS@ietf.org <mailto:RATS@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RATS mailing list
> RATS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email