Re: [Roll] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl> Thu, 16 April 2015 07:01 UTC

Return-Path: <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D3EE1B2A73; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:01:37 -0700 (PDT)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham
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 MQ4eqG-RNbJ8; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:01:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lb3-smtp-cloud6.xs4all.net (lb3-smtp-cloud6.xs4all.net [194.109.24.31]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45D761B2A59; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:01:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from roundcube.xs4all.nl ([194.109.20.203]) by smtp-cloud6.xs4all.net with ESMTP id GX1X1q00G4NtgTm01X1Xrk; Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:01:32 +0200
Received: from [2001:983:a264:1:f92a:d77a:7105:f7da] by roundcube.xs4all.nl with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:01:31 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:01:31 +0200
From: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Mail-Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
In-Reply-To: <12442.1429113740@sandelman.ca>
References: <20150408233408.4123.3118.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <fb86c816367f2cef72685d1cbaf23e2a@xs4all.nl> <14934.1429043465@sandelman.ca> <0b35569a80c62337655b16c7010a84da@xs4all.nl> <12442.1429113740@sandelman.ca>
Message-ID: <32c66dc3bb9f396188b90a178ff767d9@xs4all.nl>
X-Sender: stokcons@xs4all.nl (3/jw3nPcLgS3E8HAJ+dWI+e4g0CWHes5)
User-Agent: XS4ALL Webmail
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/b8MUFpCnQZlii1MxiDasQ_vPBnM>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:13:58 -0700
Cc: mcr@sandelman.ca, roll-chairs@ietf.org, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building.ad@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building.shepherd@ietf.org, yvonneanne.pignolet@gmail.com, draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-09: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <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: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 07:01:37 -0000

HI Michael,

See below:


> The document has to specify solutions that exist;  that the current 
> solutions
> do not cover all deployment cases may be acceptable to document.  In 
> this
> specific case, we could write:
>          "This document does not specify a multicast security solution.
>          Networks deployed with this specification will depend upon 
> layer-2
>          security to prevent outsiders from sending multicast traffic.
>          It is recognized that this does not protect this control 
> traffic
>          from impersonation by already trusted devices.  This is an 
> area
>          for a future specification."
> 
> At least we recognize and document the limitations.
<peter>
OK, this is perfectly acceptable for multicast. When there are no other 
suggestions or objection, the draft is changed accordingly

However, concerning alinea 3 in section 7.1 references to dtls-relay and 
security-6top are informational references and do not influence the 
specification part.
On the mailing list there was at least support for mentioning 
dtls-relay.
So, I like to keep them.
</peter>
>     >> I would like prefer that this document was even more precisely 
> about
>     >> what kind of 15.4 security is being used, either directly 
> profiling
>     >> the relevant parts of the 802.15.4 specification, or by indirect
>     >> reference to something that does.
>     >>
>     > The draft mentions ZigBee and Wi-SUN HAN. Any additional 
> suggestions?
> 
> Yes, it does.  Can we specify them more clearly?  I think that it would 
> be
> either Zigbee IP (-2013? is it?) *OR* Wi-SUN HAN (I have no clue about 
> this
> one).
<peter>
I don't understand what you mean.
You want references to documents? Explaining the standards seems not 
really called for here.
</peter>

Peter