Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-04

Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com> Fri, 17 April 2020 17:17 UTC

Return-Path: <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
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 666BD3A097C for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:17:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.086
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.086 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.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 sr6-dRLw_KWj for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk1-xa32.google.com (mail-vk1-xa32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a32]) (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 331773A0B95 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk1-xa32.google.com with SMTP id 10so756922vkr.7 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=z6eslNs2WL/VvYyPXFzcgheq6N4iAHnJNwe2kRfLKro=; b=Mgnou1xfPBJ23G2DsBWOKOQTSqeBjqvf2aMO/XyEiPFC2zVmm9lzuA3Ks0BMd/MxQQ 1VBs81Fq/pDA+bfDkOV/8Nbc/0bRLm6dvhAjQ3YtBgvMikweFWtixqsVKCyCV+4U9+cj Gu3gU4YvR8U2bvNK3lDXXUoAOwckvnQHfMSF/8umYD+sCg33iWYMMmyAWExmJi+j5WWK vCI7fXC6Ht4NWRraaHiVhwzwebzDbafRUFkqwU0MOC+27euG9LzdB/7VeT87+Q4STLJ2 Wl0zySebD3Nn63wYEdsJOxcyVpstF0K6ffajZeErI7roajn5QEMK+Gl1SXtZjeC4DLlj U3Dw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=z6eslNs2WL/VvYyPXFzcgheq6N4iAHnJNwe2kRfLKro=; b=llD4/Lq2K9gcYSyulUfYXzR9RxsAqMvvAjBAylf2cmqkljIKXeFD5PfDiNl5B96UCb 05wKHMHkFQC0z9KBuDj2Pn2LV/bNPSl7gNuTThTYln0MR/TMpoZk53oNtQKKY+KLWuxY OiUCyFKwJYROfBlaJOLiCLDk8hul/zTZjhOp8tStKCQ90GqXoQ0qBDjyUqHMoNoBeb5L ZV2mQ/3QhJRUhKQKN1SdxRfNKPvB/7nad7dz7tmBOet/+EsfEr/DRYn/EQkcti1QclCl y9W+ZArxBwQf4sLQkWo8NFik+hqU14ki5yAJkKxV323I47Jqf+N/R1B50KizUb/7/cR0 RzPA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pub7/OflLchfhXB94d8yQhDhKHbje6x5b3Yrb2n9RQQDfyqzVO+y JjQzee3SYuXKLAyZkUk2GrOxIgFr0zcJEMGBxWo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIN6hlNLUhlVh0ethf/l/TAqjSMec9XKNiuPkvvxrMfMjrzhVx88NJqScoCR/75uojEnAjMUDfVUCQo3ADYLo8=
X-Received: by 2002:a1f:aa48:: with SMTP id t69mr3407518vke.43.1587143697950; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:14:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <7256_1587134305_5E99BF61_7256_437_22_DABF89D6.74007%dominique.barthel@orange.com> <CAP+sJUdTE_6FD6DW0qOcbU+AeYQLzYEH_Yr_jraSdJXR3PpVPQ@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB35651E04EF3887BD2D3D4706D8D90@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAP+sJUc0fBVzfwViS_D8QJ5poKbc6VUr7ZRden5y3gz=SkAdpQ@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB3565CB72AA92AF7F845FB2E7D8D90@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB3565CB72AA92AF7F845FB2E7D8D90@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 20:14:20 +0300
Message-ID: <CAP+sJUeigcQ9SMJnqBior1xiokGA+030m463YBSbdVAgUFWqRA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, dominique barthel <dominique.barthel@orange.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000541a0205a37fb0cd"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/hBCe2r5rQp8BHEpz5WK8Qp-Ni3g>
Subject: Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-04
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 17:17:42 -0000

Many thanks Pascal, checked it and write-up updated.

Best regards,

Ines.

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 7:53 PM Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:

> Just submitted 07 😊
>
>
>
> Please check
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-07
>
>
>
> Many thanks again, Ines,
>
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
>
> *From:* Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
> *Sent:* vendredi 17 avril 2020 18:46
> *To:* Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>
> *Cc:* Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>rg>;
> dominique barthel <dominique.barthel@orange.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-04
>
>
>
> Hi Pascal,
>
>
>
> I agree with your suggestions, thank you very much for your fast response.
>
>
>
> I mentioned sybil attack just an example of a possible threat, just
> thinking, e.g. In a sybil attack, a malicious node might utilizes uses
> several RPL Instances to compromise the whole network. (I might be wrong).
>
>
>
> Anyway, I agree to stick with the security modes that you proposed.
>
>
>
> Have a great weekend and thanks,
>
>
>
> Ines.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 7:13 PM Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
> pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Ines
>
> Many thanks for your comments and for shepherding this document!
>
> Please see below:
>
> > Since the document includes double RPL Instance scenario. Do you think
> that security considerations should mention what security aspects involve
> RPL multi-instance operation (e.g. sybil attacks, etc.)?. Maybe it would be
> worthy to reminder that the security modes preinstalled or authenticated is
> applicable also on multi-instances scenarios.?
>
> I'm unclear how sybil attacks would play there, please help me out if you
> think that there's a relevant case here beyond the security mode
> discussion. For that I suggest to add:
> "
>    The 2 instances MUST be operated with the same security guarantees,
>    e.g., both "unsecured" with a lower layer security of a same
>    strength, both "preinstalled" or both "authenticated" security mode
>    (see section 3.2.3 of [RFC6550] for more details on those modes).
>    The latter mode could be use to enforce the segregation of updated
>    and non-updated nodes, by providing the keys for joining as routers
>    to the updated nodes only.
> "
>
>
> > Nits: The abstract does not mention explicitly that this draft updates
> RFC6550 and RFC8138. It would be nice to state that on the abstract.
>
> Yes, what about:
> "
>    This document updates RFC 8138 and RFC 6550 by defining a bit in the
>    RPL configuration option to indicate whether RFC 8138 compression is
>    used within the RPL Instance, and specify the behavior of RFC
>    8138-capable nodes when the bit is set and reset.
>
> "
>
> Will that work? I'll publish as soon you give me your green light.
>
>
> Many thanks again... keep safe and take care;
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
> [1]
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138/shepherdwriteup/
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 5:38 PM <mailto:dominique.barthel@orange.com>
> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> The WGLC for draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138 has been open since Feb 20th.
> Since then, the draft has received reviews from Rahul and myself, which
> lead the authors to publish –05 and –06.
> We believe all the actionable comments have been addressed.
> Therefore, the WGLC is now officially closed.
> Inès has kindly volunteered to be the shepherd for this draft, and is
> going to do her write-up before we release the document to our AD.
> Thanks to her for taking up that role, and thanks to all of you for your
> contributions!
>
> Dominique & Ines & Michael
>
> De : Roll <mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Dominique Barthel
> <mailto:dominique.barthel@orange.com>
> Répondre à : "mailto:roll@ietf.org" <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
> Date : Friday 6 March 2020 12:08
> À : "mailto:roll@ietf.org" <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
> Cc : "mailto:mariainesrobles@googlemail.com" <mailto:
> mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
> Objet : Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-04
>
> Working Group,
>
> The WGLC for draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-04 was due to expire yesterday.
> No comment was received so far.
> Before we equate silence with agreement, please take some time to reflect
> on this draft, maybe even review it and most importantly send your thoughts.
> Simple responses like "yes", "I approve it" are valid, too.
> As chairs, we need to gauge consensus. Please help us serving the
> community.
> Best regards
>
> Inès & Dominique
>
> De : "mailto:mariainesrobles@googlemail.com" <mailto:
> mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
> Date : Thursday 20 February 2020 10:16
> À : "mailto:roll@ietf.org" <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
> Cc : Dominique Barthel <mailto:dominique.barthel@orange.com>
> Objet : WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-04
>
> Dear all,
>
> This is a Working Group Last call for draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-04
>
> Please send your comments by 5th March 2020
>
> Thank you very much in advance,
>
> Ines and Dominique.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez
> recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
> falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
> information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
> delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
> modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez
> recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
> falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
> information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
> delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
> modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
>