Re: [lisp] AD review of draft-ietf-lisp (part 6)

Dino, On 10/31/2011 05:01 AM, Dino Farinacci wrote: This experimental specification does not address automated key management (AKM).BCP 107provides guidance in this area. Yes, but I think we should include two additional important pieces of inf

[lisp] Map-Register replays

G just don't want to take on that work then we probably need to revisit the resolution of the DISCUSS point to further figure out the implications of replayed Map-Register messages. So, does the above sound like a plan? Thanks, Stephen. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft

Re: [lisp] Map-Register replays

hould take on this relatively minor work after the experimental RFCs are published. Dino On Jan 12, 2012, at 2:58 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: Hi, I have a DISCUSS on the base document [1] and -ms [2] (same thing really) noting that Map-Register messages, while authenticated, can be replayed whi

Re: [lisp] RFC 6830 - possible extension.

Hi Nick, all, Just FYI, we very recently created a new non-wg list [1] partly for general discussion of techniques like this. So far, that's mostly been about higher layer things (e.g. mail) but this work seems entirely on-topic for that list too. I think it'd be useful for that new list to cons

Re: [lisp] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-lisp-threats-07.txt

Hi, A question: does this take into account recent revelations related to pervasive monitoring? (Which is not all passive.) There's a -00 draft [1] that makes a start at describing part of the relevant threat model. Now while that's at a very early stage, and it wouldn't be fair to say that this

Re: [lisp] draft-farinacci-lisp-crypto-01 - Call for WG Adoption

I like that you're doing this work so am supportive. I think it'd be good to try get some security folks to review before folks get too far in implementations, but I'm not sure when that'd be. But feel free to hassle me or Kathleen and we can try get that done when you think it's the right time, i

Re: [lisp] draft-farinacci-lisp-crypto-01 - Call for WG Adoption

On 04/12/14 16:13, Dino Farinacci wrote: > >> I like that you're doing this work so am supportive. I think > > Yes, we have included you guys from the get-go, per Joel's good > suggestion. Your expertise was useful to make us understand where the > state of the art in cryptography is. > >> it'

Re: [lisp] draft-farinacci-lisp-crypto-01 - Call for WG Adoption

On 05/12/14 21:45, Fabio Maino wrote: > On 12/5/14, 9:36 AM, Dino Farinacci wrote: >>> Hi Dino, >>> I have no problems with the control plane part. An encap with >>> multiprotocol support would allow to do IPsec encap before LISP >>> encap, and could be used with the unauthenticated DH mechanism

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-impact-04: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-impact-04: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

Re: [lisp] LISP crypto

On 06/11/15 00:03, Dino Farinacci wrote: > Amjad, we are aware of the QC-safe work going on in CFRG. We are > following it but it is very researchy at this point. Correct. It would be premature IMO to try to incorporate any functionality that aims to mitigate QC attacks against asymmetric crypt

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-threats-14: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-threats-14: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-threats-14: (with COMMENT)

item was to discuss threats against LISP as documented already. > I would like to see the crypto work covered, but it seems incorrect to > the charter and likely to cause a further significant delay in an > overdue document. > > Yours, > Joel > > On 1/19/16 7:07 AM, Stephen F

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-threats-14: (with COMMENT)

s ciao > > L. > > >> On 19 Jan 2016, at 15:56, Stephen Farrell wrote: >> >> >> >> On 19/01/16 14:50, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >>> Stephen, than you for the comments. >>> >>> With regard to the question of discussing lisp-crypto,

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-threats-14: (with COMMENT)

Hi Luigi, Just on this bit, the rest is fine... On 22/01/16 12:15, Luigi Iannone wrote: > What about the following: > > > Attackers can be classified according to the following four modes of > operation, i.e., the temporal and spacial diversity of the attacker. > These modes

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-lisp-03-00: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's Yes on draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-09: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-09: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-17: (with DISCUSS)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-17: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-08: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4270 [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6194 > >Authors will take in your comments in the next revision of the draft. > > Anton > > On Thursday 27 October 2016 14:44, Stephen Farrell wrote: >> Stephen Farrell has entered the following

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

you have an IANA registry for those yet or not, doing it in text is fine.) S > > Anton > > On Tuesday 01 November 2016 22:09, Stephen Farrell wrote: >> Hiya, >> >> On 01/11/16 18:51, Anton Smirnov wrote: >>> Hello Stephen, >>> >>>

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-17: (with DISCUSS)

Hi Dino, Apologies for the slow response... I checked the diff from -17 to -20 before replying. On 14/10/16 14:21, Dino Farinacci wrote: >> I basically support Alexey's discuss position and Ben's comment but >> with a bit more detail below. > > Thanks for your comments Stephen. > >> - section

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-17: (with DISCUSS)

Hi Dino, On 08/11/16 16:42, Dino Farinacci wrote: >> Hi Dino, >> >> Apologies for the slow response... >> >> I checked the diff from -17 to -20 before replying. > > Great, thanks. Please ack based on if you agree with my responses > below. I didn’t see anything you said where I need another up

Re: [lisp] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-17: (with DISCUSS)

On 21/11/16 23:50, Dino Farinacci wrote: > Snipping text a bit to make email more readable by third-parties. > >>> >>> It is a canonical form for all new types of addresses or >>> information we want to add in the future. >> >> So maybe I'm being thick but I still don't see how one reliably >>

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's Abstain on draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-22: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-22: Abstain When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https

[lisp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-09: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-09: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

Re: [lisp] [Ideas] WG Review: IDentity Enabled Networks (ideas)

that seems quite reasonable sure. S. > > Cheers, Dino > >> On Oct 4, 2017, at 12:45 PM, Stephen Farrell >> wrote: >> >> >> Hiya, >> >> TL;DR - I am now even more convinced that this ought not go ahead. >> (Sorry;-) >> >> On