Re: [sacm] ECP question

Dan Ehrlich <dan@ehrlichserver.com> Sat, 13 April 2019 00:45 UTC

Return-Path: <dan@ehrlichserver.com>
X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5349112045A for <sacm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 17:45:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ehrlichserver.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 M0KSujlecdAw for <sacm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 17:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22b.google.com (mail-lj1-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22b]) (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 E8370120453 for <sacm@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 17:45:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22b.google.com with SMTP id h16so10394197ljg.11 for <sacm@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 17:45:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ehrlichserver.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=rGSZ940eo8BkgcDhbCpuZqA6k/a6QLPJ+kW12PVHbTs=; b=Ro4AzFZwgJCr13uHnG4HS+4UX1azlOnxHRC+hA8sxCyBLvlZ7h7YKJB4knX11LZyst EtcJg/XthXvpmpIDJeMwX7PDgznSA3RGgO18/WxLtVNi8a53jq/Kl3uGSkZqHHRJ846U mz00wp7qeq4EtBpIAX6vlbN8MKFeqvC7zjwRo=
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; bh=rGSZ940eo8BkgcDhbCpuZqA6k/a6QLPJ+kW12PVHbTs=; b=LtLkKZ3MZPFoJNV18IjQVqqisDLgu2Dj7y+ZDpb9Omqk8PRZB5F8QSvReRql8YaxpK 3y8pWEazDFFyIoQcrecyYjoBSTzQvJX9/FWxEB8x2sCF0LmccHA0q/J5sQFqbLBMOk2Y 4TZIy3TtxyL5bCAtF8k3ZFYHQzteh987pwNZ/Yq/pYzH/pMxD0Vp4UI+3eGGA4SXzYTe SD/24vpm5IMQQqQ56q3qk7AJ3kGS6hPgB90rW8Yt+4wDCtXjbiqcWmixgcPyJR1KG9Xs yq7ZwNDQIxjWNlxbTQ8KKS0gChrwZeGeFDA4e86UQvRq7qtU5xSXYfzH26p6ipUG2q6m 00zg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVKtYrwHXDEbG7i8Rnrag0Dain9ZdrAWQMDPDCJOL47KcFutMBh C4tiWz+7IYocMza26IdmxY8c67qvcvkfjvmTSJb2dcZlHjd48A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxTMIKk9w6DuGnvbJzC7IhQmPSnBgknLOncCgaaYcylgDYPvvqpALNcmp2DXOkiMdQHMsVDp0TZmcZBYiw7rM4=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9d12:: with SMTP id t18mr31720570lji.163.1555116336163; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 17:45:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAABgnxisAZdgVWH11Rp-6NoNhwDnFUz2Bc3wYez-oCb0LA0JFQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAABgnxisAZdgVWH11Rp-6NoNhwDnFUz2Bc3wYez-oCb0LA0JFQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dan Ehrlich <dan@ehrlichserver.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 17:45:24 -0700
Message-ID: <CAABgnxjPQL27bth-BwBYaKaKU941XRDRdsbpoZ1WxPcdEpmVhA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "draft-ietf-sacm-ecp@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-sacm-ecp@ietf.org>, "sacm@ietf.org" <sacm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cd312205865ebc0b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sacm/91rDyxINbIVWM4cGLlGv25Ylcdw>
Subject: Re: [sacm] ECP question
X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: SACM WG mail list <sacm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sacm>, <mailto:sacm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sacm/>
List-Post: <mailto:sacm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sacm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm>, <mailto:sacm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 00:45:41 -0000

Link I mentioned:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sacm-ecp/?include_text=1

Section 3.2.1

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 5:42 PM Dan Ehrlich <dan@ehrlichserver.com>; wrote:

> In the RFC for ECP, there is a section that mentions the potential use of
> MAC addresses for identifying endpoints.
>
> My understanding is that there are many things wrong with MAC addresses
> today, such as that they can now be changed randomly by software, can't
> really be verified, can be spoofed easily, etc.
>
> I cannot find the link I was using from yesterday, but can the MAC address
> mention be removed from ECP?
>
>
> Apologies if I viewed an old draft or if this was previously discussed,
>
> Dan Ehrlich
> Austin, Texas
> https://linkedin.com/in/danehrlich/
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/danehrlich/>
>