Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-02
Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> Mon, 20 August 2012 04:14 UTC
Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACD7621F866A for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tkfw-2LEPzzW for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E369721F8668 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo14 with SMTP id fo14so5290021vcb.31 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=WetdwWsPLMKeUENDciXZETZRz4HJVgRToP8L+tyEEsM=; b=PH6vVF6S83F/rp0COAhJHA4tIKZDf+CXRL4kE2W2JtI0uyrEEx4r3DGqySYlQbfMgQ aXMcrvN0wpKTl6oB+ySiMgXSzxkYXtCpLqQfQtA3GriH/cz9KJE+90n6Dra7ovbsAI8/ 8jDusmAC1PIeFGYIiOicwlU3XPhySeIJvxTnuQTkCB4t8qdT+sH3qCrLY4y2DkBxHIdK awbnZonGBJLrIZO6gQ9mgiKCh4BjKPBtab0K3egewFhcWVppnd/D0j2j0XDmF0DNOk4M 4UQkZLFmAKyTUT3hHH+O2HEGVQF0ieDhWIhzwLcE4n7DdiYYXbhEs6l/Mo27saLNTUnJ aDuw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.220.203 with SMTP id hz11mr6645478vcb.50.1345436081250; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: christopher.morrow@gmail.com
Received: by 10.58.216.42 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAH1iCiqnx4MHwSFYMHJDKKXaLi+DAKUzNpqMoELpWM6NP0RxMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <24B20D14B2CD29478C8D5D6E9CBB29F625F5604B@Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com> <CAH1iCiorpj6N55B9RQCvWcTgEbUZ+Vgcr4Hhc-+h8A93U8HbHA@mail.gmail.com> <24B20D14B2CD29478C8D5D6E9CBB29F625F5FF30@Hermes.columbia.ads.sparta.com> <CAH1iCipC+Gf4PGyHhUsHgL4H1d5VwvP4+rKGay6nYqfZRrQaEw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH1iCiqnx4MHwSFYMHJDKKXaLi+DAKUzNpqMoELpWM6NP0RxMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 00:14:41 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ypWuwSuH9IEXBtRUuAHnlCYjJ3w
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaav1E60z_WToBRA_MqiWGZ6r0t0ngKSJA0HY4ktsjU8=Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "Murphy, Sandra" <Sandra.Murphy@sparta.com>, "sidr@ietf.org" <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-02
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 04:14:42 -0000
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Brian Dickson <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Brian Dickson > <brian.peter.dickson@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'll try to be more clear: >> >> I do not believe comments regarding _any_ version of the draft in >> question, have been adequately addressed (on the mailing list, or in person, >> or in the document). >> <snip> >> I would respectfully point out the dates of the discussion, and a few of >> the subject lines, as follows: <snip> >> "Route Leaks message to IDR" (3/21/2012 onward) I think there is text in the draft now about residual threats and route-leaks. I believe the status on the 'do something in grow so something happens in idr so something can happen in sidr' is 'waiting on author to get unstuck and proceed'. which is fine, but shouldn't hold up this doc which can be fixed/altered/etc once/if there is output from grow/idr that sidr can do something about. >> Also, given that draft-dickson-sidr-route-leak-solns exists and has not >> expired, and that IDR has been asked to review the route-leaks issue, and >> have themselves asked GROW to take a look at it, it would be more >> appropriate to have the -threats- doc refer to this draft, and to the >> ongoing IETF process of codifying route-leaks, rather than disingenuously >> continuing to state that nothing codifies route-leaks in the IETF. I don't think it's disingenuous... the threats doc says: ""Route leaks" are viewed as a routing security problem by many network operators, even though there is no IETF-codified definition of a route leak. BGP itself does not include semantics that preclude what many perceive as route leaks. Moreover, route leaks are outside the scope of BGPSEC, at this time, based on the SIDR charter. Thus route leaks are not addressed in this threat model." currently there isn't a completed definition, that's not to say that eventually there may be, and the doc can be updated then. Hopefully when there is a definition we can also have some 'method to fix them' from idr. <snip> >> The importance of this is that in considering the body of work of the WG, >> and in particular potentially deploying BGPSEC (in whatever form it >> emerges), operators _must_ be given all the necessary information, including >> whether BGPSEC protects against threats that actually exist. Pretending the >> threats do not exist, by not detailing them in the "Residual Threats" >> section, is really not what I would consider IETF-worthy. no one is pretending anything (I think), we are awaiting some results from the aforementioned groups/authors. I believe the other folk who were interested in this topic are satisfied with the direction. I think it's time to move the document along. -chris
- [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats-02 Murphy, Sandra
- Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats… Brian Dickson
- Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats… Murphy, Sandra
- Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats… Brian Dickson
- Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats… Brian Dickson
- Re: [sidr] WGLC on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-threats… Christopher Morrow
- [sidr] Some comments on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-th… Danny McPherson
- Re: [sidr] Some comments on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpse… Stephen Kent
- Re: [sidr] Some comments on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpse… Danny McPherson
- Re: [sidr] Some comments on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpse… Andrew Chi
- Re: [sidr] Some comments on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpse… Andrew Chi
- Re: [sidr] Some comments on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpse… Andrew Chi