IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] Comment on draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-13

Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Mon, 23 March 2020 23:17 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE7E93A0EF4 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 16:17:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.318
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.318 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
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 QwdUOy7NY_WK for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 16:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99DFB3A0ED2 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 16:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=YGe4bAs7a1aUG+wVFkxYhZpIQwiQm9Eo04K/aSTlb5o=; b=1OO0rRT6JUHbUN0iB5vaOq/HM 6eXhHTDxAg7PqJ2bx2XXd/Dy/q/SY2XuRzeMV2HFuJrd0kN+ORgv4jj9H1Mn62UGLuOfNfX+I4I6f rD8vzW+StldtNvssQaMKxJSGEgSfjj/dtrI6850En3tAKlJuSJviaQLhaqQQ7U/QOy4vQabS8b5hL 80Xbm+/1FeetG28MOj3m5/PH0znMXCeMHs8JMLJF4x+lXIdzluhion++tuj6/X/D2AaqQe4oQ61oj axMFoLNjWdDp2UT7HJVCtLtGlrOAl5+iWMi74ZTHpwhNpncvlgttGXWugosL8Zsf1QVq9Qyt6Xjbd NJFoTSgpA==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:50265 helo=[192.168.1.10]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1jGWJk-002i6i-BD; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 19:17:16 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5A01879E-E7F0-410F-80E0-EDAE341F61D4"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36RvMOkmQt3x26Loz3eLjKQw7xq=dHhfKoZLnczCyW_TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 16:17:11 -0700
Cc: "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <1FE363C7-D91C-457A-92C3-A473241F0E8B@strayalpha.com>
References: <CALx6S349SE2Ho0V2bJPSE7dh3+2f5Wiw1AofMke0RY4FwF=ebw@mail.gmail.com> <679FAA73-401E-499D-87CB-10F973E05DD6@strayalpha.com> <MN2PR19MB40455E00DB52880A38EB494C83F00@MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com> <CALx6S36RvMOkmQt3x26Loz3eLjKQw7xq=dHhfKoZLnczCyW_TQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/7tIgqo3yTcgKh8AZrJqUh-vdgVA>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Comment on draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-13
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 23:17:19 -0000


> On Mar 23, 2020, at 4:11 PM, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> 
> Unfortunately, all this degenerates to the only real incentive
> for exposing transport layer information is that if we don't expose it
> then the network may our drop packets.

Indeed - like I said, extortion.

That’s exactly how many NATs and other types of port/service blockers work now. I don’t think we should be increasing that capability.

I haven’t seen a reason to expose headers that isn’t of this type…

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email