Re: [Secdispatch] Controller-IKE

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 08 August 2019 02:44 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B15120033 for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 19:44:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 6JDzaIEl8D74 for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 19:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 451E5120091 for <secdispatch@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 19:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2:56b2:3ff:fe0b:d84]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB69E3818D; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:43:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05431479; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:44:11 -0400 (EDT)
To: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, secdispatch@ietf.org
References: <CDF90625-34F6-40C3-8AE4-AACD50D70C2E@cisco.com> <CAHbuEH7NQ3DV1nt_vq2wyQ4yZC2carVmRk8LfURGe9eWHfboeQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Message-ID: <fa991907-8b5d-9fed-959d-3a4b6d50d3b8@sandelman.ca>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:44:10 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHbuEH7NQ3DV1nt_vq2wyQ4yZC2carVmRk8LfURGe9eWHfboeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdispatch/37BfXCmQPLRAbkOIHkyDQI8BfFk>
Subject: Re: [Secdispatch] Controller-IKE
X-BeenThere: secdispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Dispatch <secdispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2019 02:44:17 -0000

On 2019-07-22 10:28 a.m., Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> Could you please explain how this is different from the adopted work in 
> I2NSF, 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection/ ?
> 
> This is referenced in your draft along with one another, but there is no 
> analysis on why they don't fit the need.  The draft in I2NSF pulled in 
> the IPsecMe working group and underwent significant revisions as a 
> result to deal with several initial security issues.  If there 's a gap 
> that can be solved with that draft, could that be a way forward or is 
> this needed for some specific reason?  It would be helpful to understand 
> this.

I read David's response.
I'm still unclear if I2NSF turned down this work or what?
Is there a conclusion from secdispatch at this point?