[stir] Next level of agenda detail

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Wed, 23 October 2013 21:55 UTC

Message-ID: <526845B5.40400@nostrum.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:55:01 -0500
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: stir@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 173.57.89.224 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Subject: [stir] Next level of agenda detail
Precedence: list

Stir WG -

Below is the next level of detail for the agenda in Vancouver. As we indicated before,
we'll spend the first session concentrating on the threats and requirements, and the second
starting to explore mechanism.

As you can see from the repository, we've only had one update to the mechanism drafts.
Rather than simply going through the drafts during the second session, lets try to work
through some major questions in the context of those drafts. With that in mind, we propose
the following agenda:


Tuesday, 5 November 2013: 1300-1400

10m Chairs/Administrivia
20m Problem statement - Jon Peterson
        http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-stir-problem-statement/
        draft-ietf-stir-problem-statement-00.txt
30m Threats - Jon Peterson
        http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-stir-threats/
        draft-ietf-stir-threats-00.txt

Wednesday, 6 November 2013, 1550-1720

5m Administrivia

25m Constraints on signature construction and validation: Jon Peterson
    - what fields are included in the signature?
    - should that list be configurable?

40m Credential Acquisition: Jon Peterson and Hadriel Kaplan
    - how can signers and verifiers obtain the appropriate credentials?
    - what does a verifier need to access credentials (a number, a number range, some other hint)?
    - is access to the credentials public or private?
    - are credentials associated with a single number, a range, or an arbitrary set?

20m Gatewaying: Hadriel Kaplan
    - what constraints do we have on signature construction so that the signature is likely to survive
      transition through other protocols (can we build something that can be passed through UUI?)

Reading for the second session:
   http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kaplan-stir-cider/  (draft-kaplan-stir-cider-00.txt)
   http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kaplan-stir-ikes-out/  (draft-kaplan-stir-ikes-out-00.txt)
   http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jennings-stir-rfc4474bis/  (draft-jennings-stir-rfc4474bis-00.txt)
   http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rescorla-stir-fallback/  (draft-rescorla-stir-fallback-00.txt)

[stir] Next level of agenda detail Robert Sparks