Hi Dirk, NAT46 is not mentioned in the document because it not a scenario of high priority (please refer to behave WG charter for instance).
Saying that, I don't think we need to be exhaustive in listing all NAT flavors there; what is important is to characterize the use case. Cheers, Med >-----Message d'origine----- >De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >Envoyé : mercredi 29 mai 2013 17:11 >À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; [email protected]; [email protected]; int- >[email protected] >Cc : [email protected] >Objet : RE: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios > >Hi Med, all, >I see also the section 3.7 on femto cells with high security demands for >tunneled (mobile) data via IPSec through the fixed network. > >Another question is whether to include also a scenario for NAT46 addressing >IPv4 clients at end user nodes connected to both IPv6 RGW and IPv6 access >network? I think while many operators are starting to deploy IPv6 in their >core and aggregation networks there will always be (maybe old fashioned) >customers which continue to use their available equipment, e.g. for >telephony. >Perhaps this is already handled, e.g. in UC 3.6, but I couldn't find NAT46 >to be mentioned. Did I miss something? > >What do you think? >Thanks! > >Best regards >Dirk >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >[email protected] >Sent: Dienstag, 7. Mai 2013 16:51 >To: 'Joshua Shire'; [email protected]; [email protected] >Cc: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [fmc] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios > >Dear Joshua, > >Apologies for the delay to answer this message. > >I see your point. I will add it to the list of items to be considered for >the next iteration of the document. > >BTW, -03 already included some of requirements which cover security aspects >(see for instance REQ#1, REQ#2, REQ#3, REQ#9). Once we have a stable >requirements list, we will identify the requirements which are valid for >each use case: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-intarea-host- >identifier-scenarios-03#section-4.1 > >Cheers, >Med > >>-----Message d'origine----- >>De : Joshua Shire [mailto:[email protected]] >>Envoyé : vendredi 25 janvier 2013 08:17 >>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; [email protected]; [email protected] >>Cc : [email protected] >>Objet : RE: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios >> >>Hello, >> >>I do not believe a pointer to >>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analys >>is-04#section-3 will be satisfactory for the security >>considerations section. >> >>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3552.txt states that when writing >>a security considerations section, the process "...should be >>approached as an effort to perform "due diligence" in >>describing all known or foreseeable risks and threats to >>potential implementers and users." Normally we see RFCs >>describing more applied topics such as protocols, so the >>specific language and examples given in the above mentioned >>RFC may not seem directly applicable. However, "in spirit", >>the document seems clear in requiring all RFCs to examine in >>detail their potential security impact. >> >>As I'm sure we're all aware, some of the use cases identified >>are purposefully implemented to maintain the confidentiality >>of a client's identity (e.g. NAT to obfuscate the structure of >>an enterprise network, Open-Wifi to conceal the identity of a >>client under threat of persecution [or prosecution], etc.). >> >>Thus, in identifying these scenarios as sharing the "issue" of >>host identification, the author would seem to be required to >>discuss the potential security implications of treating the >>lack of host identification as such, rather than a desirable feature. >> >>Thanks, >> >>Joshua Shire >>Information Systems Manager >>Hyduke Energy Services Inc. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [email protected] >>[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>[email protected] >>Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 2:08 AM >>To: [email protected]; [email protected] >>Cc: [email protected] >>Subject: [Int-area] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios >> >>Dear all, >> >>We submitted an updated version of this draft to list use >>cases which encounter the issue of host identification. The >>following use cases are discussed in the draft: >> >> (1) Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) >> (2) A+P (e.g., MAP ) >> (3) Application Proxies >> (4) Provider Wi-Fi >> (5) Policy and Charging Architectures >> (6) Cellular Networks >> (7) Femtocells >> (8) Overlay Networks (e.g., CDNs) >> >>The document does not include any solution-specific >>discussion. Its main goal is to identify the use cases and >>describe them. >> >>If you think your use case is not included in this version, >>please share it with us. >> >>Comments are welcome. >> >>Cheers, >>Med >> >> >>-----Message d'origine----- >>De : [email protected] >>[mailto:[email protected]] De la part de >>[email protected] Envoyé : lundi 3 décembre 2012 08:26 >>À : [email protected] Objet : I-D Action: >>draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt >> >> >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >>Internet-Drafts directories. >> >> >> Title : Host Identification: Use Cases >> Author(s) : Mohamed Boucadair >> David Binet >> Sophie Durel >> Tirumaleswar Reddy >> Brandon Williams >> Filename : >>draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt >> Pages : 14 >> Date : 2012-12-02 >> >>Abstract: >> This document describes a set of scenarios in which host >> identification is required. >> >> >>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-i >>dentifier-scenarios >> >>There's also a htmlized version available at: >>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identif >>ier-scenarios-02 >> >>A diff from the previous version is available at: >>http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-boucadair-intarea-host-i >>dentifier-scenarios-02 >> >> >>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>I-D-Announce mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>_______________________________________________ >>Int-area mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area >> >_______________________________________________ >fmc mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fmc _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
