Re: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security
FERNANDO PASCUAL BLANCO <fpb@tid.es> Mon, 01 July 2013 13:56 UTC
Return-Path: <fpb@tid.es>
X-Original-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 4BF2511E814E for <tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Mon, 1 Jul 2013 06:56:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I9r1ILHsId2e for
<tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 06:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tidos.tid.es (tidos.tid.es [195.235.93.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com
(Postfix) with ESMTP id ECD3B11E8109 for <tcmtf@ietf.org>;
Mon, 1 Jul 2013 06:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbrightmailg01.hi.inet (sbrightmailg01.hi.inet [10.95.64.104])
by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006))
with ESMTP id <0MP9003O7G1IKL@tid.hi.inet> for tcmtf@ietf.org;
Mon, 01 Jul 2013 15:56:06 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from tid (tid.hi.inet [10.95.64.10]) by sbrightmailg01.hi.inet
(Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 6D.60.03142.67A81D15;
Mon, 01 Jul 2013 15:56:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from correo.tid.es (mailhost.hi.inet [10.95.64.100]) by tid.hi.inet
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id
<0MP9003HIG1IKH@tid.hi.inet> for tcmtf@ietf.org;
Mon, 01 Jul 2013 15:56:06 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from EX10-MB2-MAD.hi.inet ([169.254.2.38]) by
EX10-HTCAS6-MAD.hi.inet ([::1]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009;
Mon, 01 Jul 2013 15:56:05 +0200
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 13:54:57 +0000
From: FERNANDO PASCUAL BLANCO <fpb@tid.es>
In-reply-to: <014b01ce764d$dbdcc0c0$93964240$@unizar.es>
X-Originating-IP: [10.95.64.115]
To: "jsaldana@unizar.es" <jsaldana@unizar.es>,
"tcmtf@ietf.org" <tcmtf@ietf.org>
Message-id: <F5EDC35DF914C1428C28E149F10463A29C8B52AD@EX10-MB2-MAD.hi.inet>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_3XuOihf1wSOE0EC/42AKyg)"
Content-language: en-US
Accept-Language: en-US, es-ES
Thread-topic: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security
Thread-index: Ac5wrz13IWZxxTaCQH6g7L6OvBjX3AFs3v2A
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.5.130515
X-AuditID: 0a5f4068-b7f128e000000c46-c0-51d18a767bdb
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpjkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42Lhinfg0i3ruhho0HRA12LX5w2MDoweS5b8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Subject: Re: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security
X-BeenThere: tcmtf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Tunneling Compressed Multiplexed Traffic Flows \(TCMTF\) discussion
list" <tcmtf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcmtf>,
<mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcmtf>
List-Post: <mailto:tcmtf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf>,
<mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 13:56:14 -0000
Hi Jose, Yes, I agree with you. IPSec (in tunnel mode) could be included as another tunneling protocol adding the security capability to the whole TCM protocol. Best, Fernando Pascual Blanco Telefónica Global Resources Network Automation and Dynamization TECHNOLOGY PEOPLE GROUP F +34913128779 M +34682005168 fpb@tid.es From: "jsaldana@unizar.es<mailto:jsaldana@unizar.es>" <jsaldana@unizar.es<mailto:jsaldana@unizar.es>> Organization: Universidad de Zaragoza Reply-To: "jsaldana@unizar.es<mailto:jsaldana@unizar.es>" <jsaldana@unizar.es<mailto:jsaldana@unizar.es>> Date: lunes, 1 de julio de 2013 13:26 To: "tcmtf@ietf.org<mailto:tcmtf@ietf.org>" <tcmtf@ietf.org<mailto:tcmtf@ietf.org>> Subject: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security Hi all. In the “TCM-TF reference model” (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-saldana-tsvwg-tcmtf/) we say nothing in the “security” section. I am preparing an updated version. We could perhaps talk about the use of security tunnels (perhaps IPSEC) as the most straightforward solution for providing end-to-end security to the optimized tunnel. What do you think? Jose ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
- [tcmtf] Where to talk about security Jose Saldana
- Re: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security FERNANDO PASCUAL BLANCO
- Re: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security Jose Saldana
- Re: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security Julián Fernández-Navajas
- Re: [tcmtf] Where to talk about security FERNANDO PASCUAL BLANCO