Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2
Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 02 December 2019 14:04 UTC
Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E39D1202DD for <tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 06:04:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 w7JRV4TCnHhP for <tm-rid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 06:04:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA5BD120073 for <tm-rid@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 06:04:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02243818F for <tm-rid@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 09:01:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08214784 for <tm-rid@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 09:04:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "tm-rid@ietf.org" <tm-rid@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <5feb3288-b366-3580-0b1d-1134769bb305@labs.htt-consult.com>
References: <579d29aa-e3d7-9886-91b6-46641eb1f944@labs.htt-consult.com> <5feb3288-b366-3580-0b1d-1134769bb305@labs.htt-consult.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 09:04:37 -0500
Message-ID: <22730.1575295477@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tm-rid/OnUzMH73W_hcAmZSrhA-TsEA_Lo>
Subject: Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2
X-BeenThere: tm-rid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Trustworthy Multipurpose RemoteID <tm-rid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tm-rid>, <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tm-rid/>
List-Post: <mailto:tm-rid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid>, <mailto:tm-rid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 14:04:45 -0000
I am enthusiatic about this work, although I don't anticipate being able to be more than a bystandard on this. Robert Moskowitz <rgm@labs.htt-consult.com> wrote: > TM-RID will build upon the Host Identity Tag (HIT) from the Host Identity > Protocol (HIP) as an RID and augment it and supporting HIP and other IETF > technologies to add trustworthiness to the ASTM messaging suite. I think that this sentence needs editing. Too many ".. and" > The goal is > to provide trustworthiness both in an Internet connected environment and > emergency, unconnected situations within the highly constrained environment > of UAS. I think that a reference for the nature of the constrained environment might be in order. > The Host Identity Tag (HIT) is ideally, in fact uniquely, suited to work > within this RID effort. The Host Identity (HI) behind the HIT can be used to > sign Broadcast Authentication Messages, thus proving ownership of the RID > (HIT) and signed messages. HITs provide significantly superior privacy > compared to other allowed RID types while providing greater assurance to > authorized observers that they are accessing the proper PII for the UA. This wanders into solution space, and I think it would be better to omit this. > TM-RID will create specifications for HIP-augmented ASTM RID messages. > Initially this will consist of additional RID Authentication Messages that > use the HI in public key signing operations: to prove UAS ownership of a > Hierarchical HIT (HHIT); to authenticate other claims made via RID, such as > position and velocity, as having been made by the owner of that HHIT; and to > provide observers lacking current Internet connectivity with locally > verifiable UAS proof-of-registration objects. removing some of the solutions, leaving the requirements: TM-RID will create specifications to prove UAS ownership of a Hierarchical HIT (HHIT); providing a framework to authenticate other claims, such as position and velocity, as having been made by the owner of that HHIT; and to provide observers lacking current Internet connectivity with locally verifiable UAS proof-of-registration objects. I would have written this as numbered points. > For this, HIP would be amended to be used effectively in this environment: I think you could put a period instead of : and omit the next three paragraphs. > HHITs are envisioned to identify all components in the UAS/UTM (UAS Traffic > Management) environment: UA, Command Consoles, Observer devices, and > Registries. This will entail further work as experience is gained in using > HIP for UAS RID. For example, some (UTM) systems envision using OAuth for > Ground Control Systems (GCS) and authorized safety personnel. HIP as an > OAuth method may help in merging HIP into these systems. > The workgroup will need to liaison with the various SDOs working in the UAS > regulation space. Please if you could list those SDOs? Do we need to do liason agreements with them? I would be happier if that was part of the plan. How will we engage with implementers? I.e. how are we going to get running-code? -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
- [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter Robert Moskowitz
- [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Michael Richardson
- Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Card, Stu
- Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Card, Stu
- Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Michael Richardson
- Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
- Re: [Tm-rid] Proposed WG Charter v2 Card, Stu