Re: [Spud] Whats missing in SPUD (was: Re: Multipath/Mobility (was Questions based on draft-trammell-spud-req-00))

[Ted Hardie <[e-mail]>]

Howdy,

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Toerless Eckert <[e-mail]> wrote:

> As a generic side thought based on Christians concern about privacy
> (why would an app want to show a shared Tube-ID across multipath/mobile
> flows for example).
>
> To me, the problem is best explained on the following workflow:
>
> "Here is your new ID card".
> "Why would i want to have an ID card, everybody who checks ID cards is
> evil"
> "You do not have to show your ID card if you don't want to"
> "Lets go to the bar"
> "ID card please"
> "Booze or anonymity... that's the question"
> "Lets choose booze"
>
>
​You've just demonstrated a bad workflow.  To drink booze in many
jurisdictions, you need to be of a certain age.  Associating that age with
a token that can be shown (of-booze-consuming-age) is enough to meet the
requirement; showing an identity is most assuredly not required.

There are states that change your ID card when you pass that age, for
example; it is a horizontal picture in one and ​a vertical in the other.
When asked for proof of age, you can show just the picture and be granted
entrance, without showing your name, home address, or other identifying
characteristics.

What we are looking for in SPUD is a set of declarative statements that can
be made from the application to the network about the network treatment
desired and from the network to the application about the network treatment
provided.  Anything beyond that is not just surplus to requirements, it's
dangerous because you can end up subverting the security properties of the
overlying protocol (which is what the application sees and is relying on).

My two cents, in any case,

Ted





> So, whats missing in SPUD (or any prior endpoint<->network) signaling is
> the
> signaling element "If you do not show ID card, you will not get booze" or
> "if you do not use a cross-subflow Tube-ID, your load-sharing, mobility or
> multipath
> performance will suck or not work".
>
> Using the same Tube-ID is just one example. This interaction really applies
> to any possible signaling element: The anonymity freak will argue to his
> death that he doesn't want to provide information to the network... unless
> the network can persuade him that the benefit of showing outweights the
> loss of anonymity.
>
> This is primarily a question of creating a data-model of what the network
> can offer
> and tie that to a data model for what to show to get it....
>
> Cheers
>     Toerless
>