Re: [tsvwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-11.txt

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Fri, 31 January 2020 18:56 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
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 3C512120BB1 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 10:56:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 w49YdkAFJr0o for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 10:56:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.19.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33CA6120BA7 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 10:56:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from GF-MacBook-Pro.local (fgrpf.plus.com [212.159.18.54]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A7DE41B00082; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 18:56:28 +0000 (GMT)
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, tsvwg <tsvwg@ietf.org>
References: <158049570624.21112.7310029071899308381@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALx6S34jyNth7cK81A+jOdjnQjW1wFTs5qgHmO--T7MLAmKwaA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <e31ecff2-7bf1-5912-8842-f32b3c711aa9@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 18:56:27 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S34jyNth7cK81A+jOdjnQjW1wFTs5qgHmO--T7MLAmKwaA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/BXdCb1JOchQ2cHs1RiGFMWLeycc>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-11.txt
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: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 18:56:45 -0000

On 31/01/2020 18:48, Tom Herbert wrote:
> One comment:
>
> >From the draft:
>
> "Observing the protocol sequence number pattern of network usage.
> Measurements can be per endpoint or for and packet size offers one way
> to meausre this (e.g., measurements an endpoint aggregate (e.g., to
> assess subscriber usage). observing counters in periodic reports such
> as RTCP"
>
> Misspelling measure.
Ah - thanks for noting - we edited after spell-check, so we'll make sure 
to fix that.
> Note that tracking sequence numbers in the
> network, flow tracking general, typically presumes that all packets
> for a flow take the same path and consistently traverse the node
> tracking transport state information. There's no requirement in IP for
> that to hold.

True. I assume this appears as jitter or loss, but yes any view from the 
middle

wouldn't know that other packets have taken a different path; and similarly

wouldn't know whether any packets were later reodered/lost/etc after

the measurement point. I'd expect people to understand this sort of thing.

Gorry

> Tom
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 10:35 AM <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the Transport Area Working Group WG of the IETF.
>>
>>          Title           : Considerations around Transport Header Confidentiality, Network Operations, and the Evolution of Internet Transport Protocols
>>          Authors         : Godred Fairhurst
>>                            Colin Perkins
>>          Filename        : draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-11.txt
>>          Pages           : 48
>>          Date            : 2020-01-31
>>
>> Abstract:
>>     To protect user data and privacy, Internet transport protocols have
>>     supported payload encryption and authentication for some time.  Such
>>     encryption and authentication is now also starting to be applied to
>>     the transport protocol headers.  This helps avoid transport protocol
>>     ossification by middleboxes, while also protecting metadata about the
>>     communication.  Current operational practice in some networks inspect
>>     transport header information within the network, but this is no
>>     longer possible when those transport headers are encrypted.  This
>>     document discusses the possible impact when network traffic uses a
>>     protocol with an encrypted transport header.  It suggests issues to
>>     consider when designing new transport protocols, to account for
>>     network operations, prevent network ossification, enable transport
>>     evolution, and respect user privacy.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt/
>>
>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-11
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-11
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-11
>>
>>
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>