Re: [tsvwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-04.txt

Tom Herbert <> Tue, 19 February 2019 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 710A9130F27 for <>; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 09:13:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HSsV4CIiGish for <>; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 09:13:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C009F130F2A for <>; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 09:13:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id j36so23968440qta.7 for <>; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 09:13:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=kO4LNXLIwIQZslrYCXRLf8At59HRM+4eMZChbMMNhWg=; b=zewIdZQSzrRWQwTFLLDP0CUwW4QSvpokd+DS6CDtBIDQQc1N7d0H7QjOyxvooixFam 43hRGdiUsUrMURE9XDELR5AK+GajHiteUQt4YFwlJ2/yF0p8rk+megQmKmp58khJ6618 WtTfhY1we8yKbA2pA4l/6muMtqKE9FsxtH9fZg/XhxbN6JSHNhrGi3vmaeutQwF4W5Ag Wrhox/lwP9Y98E8h9DkogGeFiPF26xoPwKSymVnJjsLQHFFNU8PA8PZZshcmlvr9cjDr yXtH5ayBz7NbQikFn+hhIEzTU+mLuZ4gawYL27GYJONIQqqEJOjMKRUPM65Wi305plGh kcaQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=kO4LNXLIwIQZslrYCXRLf8At59HRM+4eMZChbMMNhWg=; b=PNHsCu6gapP8mPqQCsXHJQ9yEKmL57MyJqxDMpwbvdAPfx5+pvmElQPwvdou978fdc E1z7/VwMGbj/MmoETP+1cybIU9QI3h9xUSAfmJ0NcotvYXABRn68BR9qTaM2GDMd6I/Z D5q/6r5lhpEYkqIib18yzw+eLvaDQOA1PSqvp0r/36kAZ5KSSLVPkgOVhGF315aSWrVl OgQRrBbNbmV+SNkbxRzGaywagZaPxjpmS7wsEc+Pivkm20n3IDT5yKqmRtMtlG9Ftmba ay6KxZI+4tXtCJmPfHlG13BjmhTLE7N2eQBmBPdl267Qxj/1D4CWLFzov37Ka8AXEzXU c6Dg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuaaGDG1USSQdN5ItGFaA3ffeMdrZkfyBgtDe+TZto5P9eXGFGya 1AXb+byqD/Ijn/KnY/3wTzk3skeWq1bs9RXBj8A2LUcAaN8Dnw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IaHZGGmzRjmUZLfDIfzsYxUpKEycC+GbV5n8apVsG7p0f2Kda2k2BC9ry2oxw3jKtQMZLq5rUNulUIBfgYJ15U=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2c5a:: with SMTP id e26mr23437921qta.189.1550596395258; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 09:13:15 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Tom Herbert <>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 09:13:04 -0800
Message-ID: <>
To: tsvwg <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-04.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 17:13:20 -0000


I am still having a hard time believing that need for operators to
inspect and process transport layer information in ad hoc ways
remotely outweighs the need for users' security and privacy and to
impede protocol ossification. Regardless of the arguments in the
draft, I believe that the trend will be more use of encryption even in
the transport layer. Consequently, it would be nice if the draft had
more discussion about alternative means for network devices to get the
information about the transport layer that they need. In particular, I
still think possibility of using extension headers is far too easily
dismissed by the draft (please see my previous comments about that).


On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 12:38 PM <>; 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           : The Impact of Transport Header Confidentiality on Network Operation and Evolution of the Internet
>         Authors         : Godred Fairhurst
>                           Colin Perkins
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-04.txt
>         Pages           : 43
>         Date            : 2019-02-18
> Abstract:
>    This document describes implications of applying end-to-end
>    encryption at the transport layer.  It identifies in-network uses of
>    transport layer header information.  It then reviews the implications
>    of developing end-to-end transport protocols that use authentication
>    to protect the integrity of transport information or encryption to
>    provide confidentiality of the transport protocol header and expected
>    implications of transport protocol design and network operation.
>    Since transport measurement and analysis of the impact of network
>    characteristics have been important to the design of current
>    transport protocols, it also considers the impact on transport and
>    application evolution.
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> There are also htmlized versions available at:
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: