Re: [Tsvwg] Adopting draft-behringer-tsvwg-rsvp-security-groupkeying asWG item?

Francois Le Faucheur IMAP <flefauch@cisco.com> Mon, 28 January 2008 16:13 UTC

Return-path: <tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJWc1-0002Mk-50; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:13:33 -0500
Received: from tsvwg by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJWc0-0002Me-5T for tsvwg-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:13:32 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJWbz-0002MW-S1 for tsvwg@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:13:31 -0500
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.140]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJWbz-0003Se-DV for tsvwg@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:13:31 -0500
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,260,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="4179364"
Received: from ams-dkim-2.cisco.com ([144.254.224.139]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Jan 2008 17:13:30 +0100
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0SGDUoh011475; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:13:30 +0100
Received: from xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-331.cisco.com [144.254.231.71]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0SGDOlh021376; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:13:30 GMT
Received: from xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com ([144.254.231.72]) by xbh-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:13:17 +0100
Received: from [10.0.0.58] ([10.61.68.6]) by xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:13:16 +0100
In-Reply-To: <B1E0D83E059A1D4FB52A93E488D7AD8F2451DC@vaebe101.NOE.Nokia.com>
References: <47974BDB.70406@ericsson.com> <B1E0D83E059A1D4FB52A93E488D7AD8F2451DC@vaebe101.NOE.Nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <93EEE5F6-5272-4152-BCB7-FA3EC44E4B7F@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP <flefauch@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] Adopting draft-behringer-tsvwg-rsvp-security-groupkeying asWG item?
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:13:13 +0100
To: "<hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jan 2008 16:13:16.0990 (UTC) FILETIME=[B0EF85E0:01C861C8]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2344; t=1201536810; x=1202400810; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch@cisco.com; z=From:=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20IMAP=20<flefauch@cisco. com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Tsvwg]=20Adopting=20draft-behringer-ts vwg-rsvp-security-groupkeying=20asWG=20item? |Sender:=20; bh=xTSTmtF3+FxNZXj376fR+qyg2X5UzmZoBOFlIQJCS0Y=; b=CQZwxdeueBxAD29sheIOKm4ZVhHyFotAUaOI8KsdyumVEpYw00WITYy7k6 6rsCkwTvlBykbpJI5mW//04iBGGQDfiHelavluWw5OQS+OvvtGDXfO6kFCeg mmwpPLbbtH;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=flefauch@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----)
X-Scan-Signature: d0bdc596f8dd1c226c458f0b4df27a88
Cc: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com, tsvwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Hannes,

On 28 Jan 2008, at 11:59, <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>  
<hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com> wrote:

> Hi Magnus,
>
> There are two facets to your question:
>
> First, I believe that there is an issue that needs to be solved  
> when it
> comes to key management with RSVP. The document discusses various
> aspects although I believe that a number of changes probably need  
> to be
> made. This can, however, be covered as part of the standard working
> group procedures.
>
> Second, I am not sure what the implications of adopting this document
> are. For example, does it mean that the group then has to go for the
> solution described in [I-D.weis-gdoi-for-rsvp]?
>
> I support item 1 but I am not so sure about item 2.

draft-behringer-tsvwg discusses group keying in general and only  
mentions the specific solution of draft-weis-gdoi-for-rsvp as an  
example of solution that could be used. So it is really about item 1  
and not 2.

It would be good to hear about other potential solutions though (so  
the applicability discussions takes this into account).

Francois

>
> Ciao
> Hannes
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Magnus Westerlund [mailto:magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com]
> Sent: 23 January, 2008 16:15
> To: tsvwg
> Subject: [Tsvwg] Adopting
> draft-behringer-tsvwg-rsvp-security-groupkeying asWG item?
>
> Hi,
>
> At the meeting "Applicability of Keying Methods for RSVP Security"
> (draft-behringer-tsvwg-rsvp-security-groupkeying-01) was presented. It
> seemed to be quite a lot of support for having TSVWG develop an
> Informative document on RSVP Group keying. Thus the question to the WG
> is; Should TSVWG adopt
> draft-behringer-tsvwg-rsvp-security-groupkeying-01 as an basis for  
> a WG
> item?
>
> Best Regards
>
> Magnus Westerlund
>
> IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
> Torshamsgatan 23           | Fax   +46 8 7575550
> S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>