Hi, Thanks for the response. In my view group communication does not address the threat model in the context of Geneve, more especially, I am not sure that group communication considers that some piece of information can be disclosed to a subset of the members of the group. That said, if you believe that could be a way to address the threat model, I am more than happy to hear from you. The mls WG may also have interesting discussions related to group communications.
Instead, what I had in mind were all discussions/proposals/academic publications around TLS and the coexistence of middle boxes. Discussions includes but are not limited to an explicit signaling of the middle box, the disclosed information to the middle box versus the information not disclosed... Yours, Daniel ~ On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 12:07 PM Michael Kafka <[email protected]> wrote: > On 19/03/01/ 17:23, Daniel Migault wrote: > > > As mentioned earlier, this cannot be true and providing end-to-end > > security between three or more party has not yet been solved at the > > IETF. > > Just off the top of my head: > > OSPFv3, 7. Key Management, static keys, > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4552#page-5 > Static keys could be distributed in SDN environments through > central controller. Requires mutual trust. > > Much older GSAKMP from the era of IKE/ISAKMP, still standards > track, not obsoleted > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4535 > > Rgds, MiKa > > _______________________________________________ > nvo3 mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 >
_______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
