[Roll] [roll] #133: 9.5.1. Security Architecture

"roll issue tracker" <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org> Mon, 21 October 2013 03:27 UTC

Return-Path: <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56D9E11E8472 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 20:27:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.53
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 VPEGk6MY8Apz for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 20:27:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E6FF11E8480 for <roll@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Oct 2013 20:27:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36849 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1VY696-0002on-J3; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 05:27:08 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: roll issue tracker <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-roll-security-threats@tools.ietf.org, mcr@sandelman.ca
X-Trac-Project: roll
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 03:27:08 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/trac/ticket/133
Message-ID: <058.3ebcd19f1f3fc0fef03bd4a4106009f7@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 133
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-roll-security-threats@tools.ietf.org, mcr@sandelman.ca, roll@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: angel.lozano@upf.edu, mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca, mischa.dohler@cttc.es, roger.alexander@cooperindustries.com, tzeta.tsao@cooperindustries.com, vanesa.daza@upf.edu
Resent-Message-Id: <20131021032722.7E6FF11E8480@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 20:27:22 -0700
Resent-From: trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: roll@ietf.org
Subject: [Roll] [roll] #133: 9.5.1. Security Architecture
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Reply-To: roll@ietf.org
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 03:27:24 -0000

#133: 9.5.1.  Security Architecture

 > === Section 9.5.1[[BR]]
 > *This draft boils down to this paragraph if I'm not mistaken:
 >
 >    A ROLL protocol MUST be made flexible by a design that offers the
 >    configuration facility so that the user (network administrator) can
 >    choose the security settings that match the application's needs.
 >    Furthermore, in the case of LLNs, that flexibility SHOULD extend to
 >    allowing the routing protocol security requirements to be met by
 >    measures applied at different protocol layers, provided the
 >    identified requirements are collectively met.
 >
 > I'm absolutely fine with the first sentence.  I'm even okay with the
 second
 > sentence it gets done at the application layer all the time, but at the
 > application layer they can all point to something that's all specified
 up and
 > has MTI etc (think TLS).  If we end up doing that here then something
 similar
 > needs to end up happening.  If use cases are so broad that they can't
 possibly
 > pick an underlying security mechanism then you need to try again but
 with a
 > smaller net. -- by ST

 It is not clear that any of 9.5.1 belongs anymore.

-- 
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:               |      Owner:  draft-ietf-roll-security-
  mcr@sandelman.ca       |  threats@tools.ietf.org
     Type:  defect       |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major        |  Milestone:
Component:  security-    |    Version:
  threats                |   Keywords:
 Severity:  Active WG    |
  Document               |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/trac/ticket/133>
roll <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/>