Re: [Spud] questions on the BoF outcome

Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com> Fri, 22 July 2016 14:57 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4880512DB6C for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 07:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.807
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.807 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] 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 aSdTTm71ujRB for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 07:57:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D792D12D612 for <spud@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 07:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4347; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1469199433; x=1470409033; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=0XoOe0u+XMC6n15ydkVo6gpZFgbUXW47V1P87BydvFA=; b=efjCiCvVzPtPbMR8JREsnwJAcrQJUm/psCdG7vz7VjtiHXb2e7Wrb3yq bPYRm2l3VnIHU5FoeAX4f8sBFQgdXHGoeB1o/IYQJjlw47SYgkNqytTku Hh9t2/7e8AvqYIVfQiEoVF+NjHflulvIN1xrughsvvJGPiRPgtNHPtO32 o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BxAwC5M5JX/5pdJa1egz9WfLhfgXsjh?= =?us-ascii?q?RpfAoEvOBQBAQEBAQEBXSdBDgGEDAEBBQEBODQLBQcECxEEAQEBCR4HDwUTHwk?= =?us-ascii?q?OE4gwDrwMAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBHIp3hCaFdQWPAYolhhZxh10Kg?= =?us-ascii?q?WxOjQCQIR42hBMcMgGFPoM0AQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,405,1464652800"; d="scan'208";a="300259783"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jul 2016 14:57:12 +0000
Received: from mcast-linux1.cisco.com (mcast-linux1.cisco.com [172.27.244.121]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u6MEvCov002279 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:57:12 GMT
Received: from mcast-linux1.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by mcast-linux1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6MEvBQP021351; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 07:57:11 -0700
Received: (from eckert@localhost) by mcast-linux1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id u6MEvBce021350; Fri, 22 Jul 2016 07:57:11 -0700
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 07:57:11 -0700
From: Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>
To: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Message-ID: <20160722145711.GP7377@cisco.com>
References: <D3B7A676.6E71A%thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com> <EA4C43BE752A194597B002779DF69BAE241328D0@ESESSMB303.ericsson.se> <CAKcm_gMn3ubbSs7t2Vk6FkSUqFDn4x_Lm6c5gfM_-Nwx8Vy1-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAKcm_gMn3ubbSs7t2Vk6FkSUqFDn4x_Lm6c5gfM_-Nwx8Vy1-Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/HbSUuK2tZRb4GE_egCDCupz5kZg>
Cc: "Fossati, Thomas \(Nokia - GB\)" <thomas.fossati@nokia.com>, Szilveszter Nadas <Szilveszter.Nadas@ericsson.com>, "spud@ietf.org" <spud@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Spud] questions on the BoF outcome
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:57:16 -0000

Whats actually the official process for asking for support - only
Hum i the WG, or is there going to be a call here or whatever other
mailing list ?

If anyone is counting, here's one in favor of Plus WG.

Use-case: Controlled network edge to Internet firewalls wanting to have similar
flow recognition to TCP for UDP flows with replay-safe intent to receive
indication.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:48:47AM -0400, Ian Swett wrote:
> I hummed no largely because I felt I didn't clearly understand the work of
> the group, and hence couldn't evaluate whether it was possible and
> desirable.
> 
> I personally would have preferred a clearly scoped set of initial use
> cases, with other use cases of potential future interest requiring a
> re-charter.
> 
> I believe there are a lot of people interested in something along these
> lines, so my no hum was not an expression they should stop trying to move
> forward with a WG.  I also want to continue having the conversation about
> what the path needs at the IETF, because it comes up fairly often, but I
> feel there's currently no coherent forum for the conversation.
> 
> It would be great to see some amount of running code as well, with some
> clearly improved metrics for that particular use case.  I would hope small
> scale experiments would inform the WG on what topics may warrant a
> re-charter.
> 
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Szilveszter Nadas <
> Szilveszter.Nadas@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > Some other argument was e.g. overhead. There was a significant amount of
> > "NO" hums for the first question, the rest of the questions was not even
> > asked.
> >
> > It is also not clear to me, is there still hope, or is it hat eating time?
> > :)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Sz.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Spud [mailto:spud-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fossati, Thomas
> > > (Nokia - GB)
> > > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:26
> > > To: spud@ietf.org
> > > Subject: [Spud] questions on the BoF outcome
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Unfortunately I could not attend the PLUS BoF.  So, I've just gone
> > through the
> > > minutes [1] (thanks a lot, scribes) and got the feeling that this work
> > is pushed
> > > back due to the perception that it'd weaken users' privacy?
> > >
> > > I hear these arguments:
> > > - "potential to compel clients to send metadata or packets will dropped"
> > >
> > > But that could have happened already if the network wanted to (just drop
> > any
> > > TCP payload that starts with 0x16 and allow only clear-text traffic!).
> > >  Access networks that you pay for do not have that incentive though, so
> > I'm
> > > very skeptical this could now happen *because of* PLUS.
> > >
> > > - "possibility for abuse"
> > >
> > > Well, that depends on the metadata that *users* decide to leak (which is
> > a
> > > separate discussion on the vocabulary), but in general Brian's framework
> > looks
> > > pretty well designed to bias control towards the endpoints which can act
> > as
> > > circuit-breakers at any point in time.
> > >
> > > - "giving more power to the network";
> > >
> > > This is actually true, but in a good way: the network will have power to
> > send
> > > useful information to the endpoints -- if it's asked to -- while being
> > empowered
> > > by the signalling coming from the endpoints (e.g., for DDoS prevention).
> > >
> > > So, sorry but this looks a lot like FUD to me.
> > >
> > > Is the working group not formed on these grounds?  Or have more
> > substantial
> > > weaknesses been highlighted during the discussion that have not been
> > > captured in the minutes?
> > >
> > > Cheers, thanks,
> > > t
> > >
> > > [1] http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/notes-ietf-96-plus
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Spud mailing list
> > > Spud@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Spud mailing list
> > Spud@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud
> >

> _______________________________________________
> Spud mailing list
> Spud@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud


-- 
---
Toerless Eckert, eckert@cisco.com