IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Some suggestions for draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-03

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Wed, 27 August 2008 19:56 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 949483A69DC for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.341
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.341 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.154, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mgF3twFn3PIh for <ietfarch-v6ops-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:56:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD79C3A6966 for <v6ops-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:56:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org>) id 1KYR6Y-0008eR-6g for v6ops-data@psg.com; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:54:58 +0000
Received: from [171.71.176.117] (helo=sj-iport-6.cisco.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <dwing@cisco.com>) id 1KYR6S-0008dW-0T for v6ops@ops.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:54:55 +0000
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.32,281,1217808000"; d="scan'208";a="147797039"
Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Aug 2008 19:54:50 +0000
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7RJsolX029527; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:54:50 -0700
Received: from dwingwxp01 (sjc-vpn7-1321.cisco.com [10.21.149.41]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7RJsoEI001628; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:54:50 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'james woodyatt' <jhw@apple.com>, 'IPv6 Operations' <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Cc: 'Mark Smith' <ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org>
References: <20080824204553.08131c65.ipng@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org> <48B1CCE8.1070305@gmail.com> <01af01c9065b$b4602440$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <48B23391.1090503@gmail.com> <01cd01c90672$a57c8790$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <48B31DA3.6080001@gmail.com> <07d201c906f7$50a85e30$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <48B32B43.5010103@gmail.com> <084c01c906fe$f9bf1840$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <48B33430.40704@gmail.com> <08b901c90710$4064aa60$c2f0200a@cisco.com> <48B354FA.7040601@gmail.com> <48B50B10.9090005@free.fr> <15ECFC5E-7734-44ED-A652-7EFC795E6A39@apple.com>
Subject: RE: Some suggestions for draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-03
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:54:50 -0700
Message-ID: <05cb01c9087e$c40d0960$c2f0200a@cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Thread-Index: AckIeHbcC3K13kQuRIuEeJBClI022AABiWdQ
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
In-Reply-To: <15ECFC5E-7734-44ED-A652-7EFC795E6A39@apple.com>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=730; t=1219866890; x=1220730890; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dwing@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Dan=20Wing=22=20<dwing@cisco.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20Some=20suggestions=20for=20draft-ietf-v 6ops-cpe-simple-security-03 |Sender:=20; bh=TBBUhEg1zm5bGaryburnQpf0hVN5gOxvAo+bZFDSJVg=; b=uJJvfN6aghaaIqq6hcRe692N/0OXsWoJrJyCbgcOzzagzjPcC8sykbtoCf fqHA/6YMAMpne+EG1FjJQime+EXltvelXRqROS+c3urDWxDkNrTNLfhGcgdy 3ng6IjzERK;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=dwing@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; );
Sender: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <v6ops.ops.ietf.org>

> I must chime in here and repeat for the record that ALD is most  
> emphatically NOT a protocol for enabling hosts to control filtering  
> devices.  I took Great Pains to specify it as a protocol for 
> filtering  
> devices to learn about interior applications that are soliciting  
> inbound traffic from arbitrary exterior nodes regardless of their  
> remote address.
> 
> Please please please I am VERY resistant to positioning ALD as a  
> method for nodes to use in "controlling" firewall devices.

Er, it seems the same to me.  Are you just saying that the interior
host is not necessarily *overriding* the filtering device's rules?
If that's what you're saying, I agree, and I think that's fine.

-d

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email