IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [saag] should we revise rfc 3365?

Mouse <mouse@Rodents-Montreal.ORG> Tue, 29 May 2012 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <mouse@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF5B611E8128 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 May 2012 11:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.533
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.533 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.455, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 fUJ850Q1eZ-S for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 May 2012 11:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG (Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG [216.46.5.7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A0511E8102 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 May 2012 11:12:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from mouse@localhost) by Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA07055; Tue, 29 May 2012 14:12:54 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 14:12:54 -0400
From: Mouse <mouse@Rodents-Montreal.ORG>
Message-Id: <201205291812.OAA07055@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Erik-Conspiracy: There is no Conspiracy - and if there were I wouldn't be part of it anyway.
X-Message-Flag: Microsoft: the company who gave us the botnet zombies.
X-Composition-Start-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 14:10:04 -0400 (EDT)
To: saag@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718D017FDDDE@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net>
References: <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718D017BA1BE@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net> <E1SYFww-0007It-5i@login01.fos.auckland.ac.nz> <999913AB42CC9341B05A99BBF358718D017FDDDE@FIESEXC035.nsn-intra.net>
Subject: Re: [saag] should we revise rfc 3365?
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/saag>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:12:56 -0000

> For smart objects (you call them low-power devices) the approach is
> still to provide security or otherwise not connect them to the
> Internet.

That may be the approach the IETF would prefer, but the IETF is not in
a position to do that, to prevent people from connecting devices to the
Internet based on whether they speak protocols the IETF doesn't like.

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		mouse@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email