Re: [Smart] New Version Notification for draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless-00.txt

[<[e-mail]>]

Those are pretty useful questions. I’ve gotten the same comments from others off-list.  The scoping of CLESS is something we should try to make progress on the list.

 

The 5G question is a little different for me. Do you think that 5G introduces categories of endpoints that would not be present in existing, or other, transport infrastructures?  If so, I’m happy to amend the text.

 

Thanks,

 

mark

 

From: Tony Rutkowski <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 8:36 AM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Smart] New Version Notification for draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless-00.txt

 

But, there's an important question here. CLESS specifically rules out network infrastructure in its discussion. Should the taxonomy for CLESS incorporate endpoints that are part of the network infrastructure? Said a different way: is network infrastructure out of scope for CLESS? 

Do you intend this to be 5G relevant? 

-tr

On 08-Jul-19 9:26 AM, [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>  wrote:

A new version of I-D, draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Mark McFadden and posted to the IETF repository.
 
Name:            draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless
Revision: 00
Title:           Endpoint Taxonomy for CLESS
Document date:   2019-07-08
Group:           Individual Submission
Pages:           15
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless-00.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless-00
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-mcfadden-smart-endpoint-taxonomy-for-cless
 
 
Abstract:
   A separate document [I-D:draft-taddei-smart-cless-introduction]
   (CLESS) attempts to establish the capabilities and limitations of
   endpoint-only security solutions and explore potential alternative
   approaches. That document discusses endpoints in general terms. It
   has been suggested that there are classes of endpoints that have
   different characteristics. Those classes may have completely
   different threat landscapes and the endpoints may have completely
   different security capabilities. In support of the work on CLESS,
   this document provides a taxonomy of endpoints that is intended to
   provide a foundation for further work on CLESS and research on
   approaches to providing endpoint security alternatives in a diverse
   group of settings.
 
                                                                                  
 
 
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
 
The IETF Secretariat