Re: [Softwires] ISP CGN logging inc. Destination ??

"Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com> Fri, 04 May 2018 10:01 UTC

Return-Path: <rajiva@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B0712D7EC; Fri, 4 May 2018 03:01:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 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_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 ENPzP718Fh3D; Fri, 4 May 2018 03:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85E96126C26; Fri, 4 May 2018 03:01:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=13861; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1525428111; x=1526637711; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=q1hB9SpmQ6tfI8W0RxSNsET+ZON5yhr9L6/WxtQ2ncA=; b=h9KImtaPxou26ghgzVLUnlua1S/H4Z1y/nJMyXG16PMWIG9VGhU6vj8g X0DlHR9cMDcqd6JGL6rzkuhm3BqV5Pkvq1zcICs9h1y3dT0W+HrUWtfG4 67crSYhNU+Akx+ay8yteHxsQ+stJ+ek8lFZDEvPpRV+fkqMPrnFyvaVb+ k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AUAQDmLuxa/4kNJK1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJNd2F6KINtiAKMcIE9GiGBD44qhHEUgWQLGAEMhAFGAhqCGyE0GAECAQEBAQEBAmwcAQuFKQIBAwEBIUYBBAsQAgEIPwMCAgIlCxQRAgQOBYQvTAMVD6YNgSCCHIhDgkKICB2BVD+BMgyCLi6CT0IBAQOBIAGDPDCCJAKYGwgChWKIaIxZiUGEPoIfAhETAYEkAQwQOCaBGAwIcBU7KgGCGAmGdIFjgjCFPm+QOQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,362,1520899200"; d="scan'208,217";a="109325378"
Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 May 2018 10:01:50 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com (xch-aln-002.cisco.com [173.36.7.12]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w44A1oS5013273 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 4 May 2018 10:01:50 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Fri, 4 May 2018 05:01:49 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-005.cisco.com ([173.36.7.15]) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com ([173.36.7.15]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Fri, 4 May 2018 05:01:49 -0500
From: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <rajiva@cisco.com>
To: "ianfarrer@gmx.com" <ianfarrer@gmx.com>
CC: Softwires-wg list <softwires@ietf.org>, "int-area@ietf.org" <int-area@ietf.org>, "Ramesh.R.Chandra@ril.com" <Ramesh.R.Chandra@ril.com>
Thread-Topic: [Softwires] ISP CGN logging inc. Destination ??
Thread-Index: AQHT4yi6QsPwS4mEj0Wx5sa9RJtTQaQfjfGA///JlPI=
Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 10:01:49 +0000
Message-ID: <8433F1DD-3988-4DF6-B14D-3873B0F36CCB@cisco.com>
References: <56C7D96E-182F-4584-B190-DCD17957C01F@cisco.com>, <95081DF2-FBE4-4B28-802E-13988B6DDF8D@gmx.com>
In-Reply-To: <95081DF2-FBE4-4B28-802E-13988B6DDF8D@gmx.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_8433F1DD39884DF6B14D3873B0F36CCBciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/M-K7MjEgi7gF23O5KL-jVgYOnL8>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] ISP CGN logging inc. Destination ??
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/softwires/>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 10:01:55 -0000

Ian,

Thanks for sharing the URL. While not explicit, “all metadata” would include both source and destination A+P. Is that the right interpretation?

If an ISP were to use “binding” mode on the BR, then without using net flow/IPFIX, How could the compliance be achieved ?

Cheers,
Rajiv Asati
Distinguished Engineer, Cisco Services


On May 4, 2018, at 4:16 AM, "ianfarrer@gmx.com<mailto:ianfarrer@gmx.com>" <ianfarrer@gmx.com<mailto:ianfarrer@gmx.com>> wrote:

Hi,

As another data point on this topic, the storing of A+P data is also mandated in Hungary. From the Hungary paragraph of the 2016 EU report into implementation of the Data Retention Directive (http://fra.europa.eu/en/theme/information-society-privacy-and-data-protection/data-retention)

"The new law obliges electronic and IT service providers that allow encrypted communication through their services to store all metadata related to such communications for one year. It thus widens the scope of data retention."

Translated: A+P retention.

Cheers,
Ian




PS: Few may be aware of Govt. of India’s mandate* to log both source and destination IP+port pair.
Click on “Parameter to be stored in SYS Log of Network Address Translation (NAT) for Internet Access” on this page - https://www.corestack.io/blog/the-log-mandate-enabling-indian-isps-to-adhere-to-dot-compliance-rules/

PS:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6302
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7422


Session and service continuity
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
Softwires@ietf.org<mailto:Softwires@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires