Re: [tcpm] [OPSEC] draft-gont-tcp-security

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Tue, 14 April 2009 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D9AD3A6E31; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.98
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.98 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fbLNVqmelL18; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f163.google.com (mail-gx0-f163.google.com [209.85.217.163]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7293A6E1F; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk7 with SMTP id 7so573009gxk.13 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:13:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fV/JPQL733nZWB41/rMJagl/yIHeoNhAAEsSstTUcRk=; b=vAlZsIpuJ92c+2uV6RDgHKYqaIE4nPAOBPkm1PjRggkCOOOK9I6hoEuz0UmncvxJ/0 rxT/JTjB7e5bgeZLLmmJ+rm4MVVZx+kJ+/xaGsBU8m+t+x9lRRJxArwD88LIlFzem2UN RHEcPj612cB+JIQnRV8+D17Lg6cKCvZ7eyc28=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=HFhJLFOxzkKttO3vbX4oCvfAagmujZWqKF3FIZnwiuKwMpzKqVTcww+yBS4Y/y2FuI /gFqVAfOObl7x3vedYElnIwDVJBzQHzvR3U8rq3hzqXts5mApJ5lIa0UYkI6Gcy8QkDn lMerUsqiXaRKD6FrRIgPCvX1uVcIR79LVuxCY=
Received: by 10.100.45.9 with SMTP id s9mr10485951ans.133.1239732830709; Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:13:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?172.16.1.133? (host4.190-139-184.telecom.net.ar [190.139.184.4]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 6sm531735yxg.30.2009.04.14.11.13.46 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:13:49 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Fernando Gont <fernando.gont.netbook.win@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49E4D257.40504@gont.com.ar>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:13:43 -0300
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
References: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221318F5E8@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.g ov><49E36AB9.40507@isi.edu> <49E384E9.1050106@gont.com.ar><49E3878C.9080200@isi.edu> <49E39119.1060902@gont.com.ar> <B01905DA0C7CDC478F42870679DF0F1004BC4176D0@qtdenexmbm24.AD.QINTRA.COM> <49E3A88F.9060301@gont.com.ar> <49E3ABC0.1050601@isi.edu> <49E3B9BF.1060901@gont.com.ar> <49E3BED9.1030701@isi.edu> <C9E987CC-0213-4C67-BA0A-11C736772EE7@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <C9E987CC-0213-4C67-BA0A-11C736772EE7@nokia.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "'tcpm@ietf.org'" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "'ietf@ietf.org'" <ietf@ietf.org>, Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>, "Smith, Donald" <Donald.Smith@qwest.com>, 'Joe Abley' <jabley@ca.afilias.info>, "'opsec@ietf.org'" <opsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [OPSEC] draft-gont-tcp-security
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:12:40 -0000

Lars Eggert wrote:

> I agree with Joe that some of the hardening techniques that vendors are
> implementing come with consequences (make TCP more brittle). To me, this
> is a *reason* this document should be published via the IETF (i.e.,
> TCPM) - we are probably in the best position to correctly evaluate and
> classify the impact of various hardening techniques. Stack vendors have
> been putting these mechanisms in to their stacks without clear
> specifications and discussions of the potential upsides and downsides
> that would let them make an educated decision. It seems clear to me that
> the vendor community is looking for guidance here, and I do believe the
> IETF should give it.

This is the reason for which the output of the CPNI project was
submitted as an IETF I-D.

Kind regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1