Re: [v6ops] draft-xie-v6ops-network-happyeyeballs

Hi Mikael,

I got the impression that when I originally proposed this, syslog was a privacy issue because it is sending data from "customers traffic" from their own devices to the ISP.

But in the actual proposal, the data is NOT from any customer, neither identifying the customer at all.

So not sure to understand if we have failed to clearly describe the way we are measuring, or you'd in mind the previous document?

Regards,
Jordi

-----Mensaje original-----
De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Organización: People's Front Against WWW
Fecha: martes, 27 de noviembre de 2018, 12:45
Para: Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
CC: "v6ops@ietf.org list" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Asunto: Re: [v6ops] draft-xie-v6ops-network-happyeyeballs

    On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Ron Bonica wrote:

    > This week, please review and comment on 
    > draft-xie-v6ops-network-happyeyeballs.

    I think it's a great idea to tell the operator about problems, that kind 
    of telemetry can really help in operating the network.

    However, the proposed method of doing it (syslog) and the information it 
    reports (IP addresses and domains the user is communicating with) has huge 
    privacy implications. Also you have no idea who might be grabbing this 
    information before it even makes it to the ISP).

    I think at a minimum there needs to be an encrypted and verified mechanism 
    (https perhaps?) for doing the reporting, so you know where the report 
    goes.

    I see three entities that have interest in this information, it's the ISP, 
    the operating system manufacturer, and the web site which is having 
    problems. If HE fails, I see very little harm (privacy) in telling the 
    website about it using the address family that actually did work. So that 
    could be included. For the device manufacturer, they have "send 
    diagnostics information to vendor", so here customers can opt in. For the 
    ISP, I have no idea. Here it might be better to define an API between the 
    device vendor and the ISP, so that the device vendor can report problems 
    seen, at an aggregate? I have personally been involved in getting 
    operational people from my employer talking to device vendors to figure 
    out what might be wrong, and automating this would be great.

    Also, the DNSSEC implications are glossed over grossly. We should take for 
    granted that end devices are running validating resolvers and handle that 
    use-case.

    So I'm supportive of the problem statement and it would help ISPs greatly 
    if they could get telemetry from end devices, I just have great concerns 
    over the method proposed in this draft.

    -- 
    Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se

    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.