From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Mar 3 07:42:20 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D72D23A6952; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:42:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.906 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.819, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, 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 BT76vxIHSh5A; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:42:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769ED3A6913; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:42:15 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86F053A67B4 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:42:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com 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 eOSUeXtZ6puD for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:42:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (mx2.nic.fr [192.134.4.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A3863A6952 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:42:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id B15F31C00D5; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:41:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id AADF71C00D4; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:41:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D0958ECAD; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:41:59 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:41:59 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Jeroen Massar Subject: Re: Service Identity (Re: Machine Identity) Message-ID: <20080303154159.GB22158@nic.fr> References: <20080226130527.GA1404@generic-nic.net> <20080228112318.GA23196@nic.fr> <20080228114656.GD8439@elstar.local> <20080228124038.GA8852@elstar.local> <47C6B37F.2050505@ericsson.com> <47C6BA02.9090000@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47C6BA02.9090000@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-6-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 02:41:22PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote a message of 54 lines which said: > One should identify the *service* ... > SSH Keys are a good example of this, they identify the SSH > service. You can find that service on IPv4 port 22 and IPv6 port 22, > maybe on different other IP addresses or other port numbers. OK, if one remembers that a machine can host several services (as in your SSH example) but also that several machines can together host a service (for instance a cluster where the sysadmin installs the same SSH key to all members of the cluster so you can "slogin thecluster.example.net" without having to confirm the host key each time a new member is added). _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Mar 3 07:46:48 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C046C3A68BF; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:46:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.809, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, 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 MVe3JfOCKIdV; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:46:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB673A6896; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:46:43 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 473C93A6897 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:46:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com 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 7cXAV-s3Qv4t for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:46:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (mx2.nic.fr [192.134.4.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EF813A67B4 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:46:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 8F00A1C00D4; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:46:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89DC21C0096; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:46:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86A8658ECAD; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:46:29 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:46:29 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Jeroen Massar Subject: Re: Machine Identity Message-ID: <20080303154629.GC22158@nic.fr> References: <20080226130527.GA1404@generic-nic.net> <200802261547.KAA20917@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> <20080226160412.GA22833@nic.fr> <47C46FBA.2090009@dcrocker.net> <20080228163423.GC21463@nic.fr> <47C6E396.3020500@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47C6E396.3020500@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-6-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 05:38:46PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote a message of 39 lines which said: > As such, SSH-keys, HIP and OpenPGP are items you can use already for > this, the latter already has trust built in thus seems suitable for > your use. Yes, all three of them fill my requirments. The problem is that they are not "standard" (for some definition of standard). You can not rely on them being present in OS libraries, you do not have a specification separated from the specific usage they were made for, etc. Thought experiment: if SSH did not exist (but HIP and PGP do) and you were to create the protocol and write a RFC describing SSH. What would you use for host keys? Copy-and-paste from HIP RFCs? Using OpenPGP keys as they are with a normative reference to RFC 4880? _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Mar 3 07:54:26 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00B1428C2BF; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:54:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.883 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.883 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.796, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, 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 B1TrRFCEMoY5; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:54:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 876F828C1A4; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:54:12 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F24FE28C166 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:54:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com 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 Jl1T+Qdb2sz5 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:54:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (mx2.nic.fr [192.134.4.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE36628C1D9 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:52:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 9E32C1C00DF; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:52:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay2.nic.fr (relay2.nic.fr [192.134.4.163]) by mx2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992901C00DC; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:52:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from bortzmeyer.nic.fr (batilda.nic.fr [192.134.4.69]) by relay2.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CAF958ECAD; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:52:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 16:52:44 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: dcrocker@bbiw.net Subject: Re: Machine Identity Message-ID: <20080303155244.GD22158@nic.fr> References: <20080226130527.GA1404@generic-nic.net> <47C45C52.8010705@dcrocker.net> <20080228164131.GD21463@nic.fr> <47C6F044.8000901@dcrocker.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47C6F044.8000901@dcrocker.net> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 X-Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-6-686 i686 Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:32:52AM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote a message of 28 lines which said: > The requirements you have provided mean that there must be a global, > persistent registration service. No, I do not think so. Identifiers locally generated, at random, in a large space (like SSH or OpenPGP keys or HIP Host Identifiers) are OK. Besides the small risk of accidental collision, their main problem is that you cannot prevent an entity to have as many identities as it wishes. But it is exactly the same with domain names. _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Mar 3 08:52:12 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 130343A6C58; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:52:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.811, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, 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 PbBCnn+jcpLF; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:51:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C29E03A69DE; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:51:48 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D06133A69DE for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:51:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com 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 mOIPayZ8JFfU for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:51:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from abaddon.unfix.org (abaddon.unfix.org [IPv6:2001:41e0:ff00:0:216:3eff:fe00:4]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 229283A69DD for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:51:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [IPv6:2001:41e0:ff42:b00:216:cfff:fe00:e7d0] (spaghetti.ch.unfix.org [IPv6:2001:41e0:ff42:b00:216:cfff:fe00:e7d0]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jeroen) by abaddon.unfix.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54EE835A528; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 17:51:35 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <47CC2C98.2070807@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:51:36 +0100 From: Jeroen Massar Organization: Unfix User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080213 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Subject: Re: Service Identity References: <20080226130527.GA1404@generic-nic.net> <20080228112318.GA23196@nic.fr> <20080228114656.GD8439@elstar.local> <20080228124038.GA8852@elstar.local> <47C6B37F.2050505@ericsson.com> <47C6BA02.9090000@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> <20080303154159.GB22158@nic.fr> In-Reply-To: <20080303154159.GB22158@nic.fr> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 OpenPGP: id=333E7C23 X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.92.1, clamav-milter version 0.92.1 on abaddon.unfix.org X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1182484151==" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --===============1182484151== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig5433730C60799ED27C1B1A75" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig5433730C60799ED27C1B1A75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [ Merging threads :) ] Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 02:41:22PM +0100, > Jeroen Massar wrote > a message of 54 lines which said: > >> One should identify the *service* > ... >> SSH Keys are a good example of this, they identify the SSH >> service. You can find that service on IPv4 port 22 and IPv6 port 22, >> maybe on different other IP addresses or other port numbers. > > OK, if one remembers that a machine can host several services (as in > your SSH example) but also that several machines can together host a > service (for instance a cluster where the sysadmin installs the same > SSH key to all members of the cluster so you can "slogin > thecluster.example.net" without having to confirm the host key each > time a new member is added). Of course, as that would, for that setup, be a single service, thus have = one identity. This is the same with people who have a home email address, and probably = use that to communicate with family and friends, while the work email=20 address is used solely for work. Some people use either of them for both = though, thus it depends on what one uses it for in what setup. This=20 allows it to be quite generic though. Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 05:38:46PM +0100, > Jeroen Massar wrote > a message of 39 lines which said: > >> As such, SSH-keys, HIP and OpenPGP are items you can use already for >> this, the latter already has trust built in thus seems suitable for >> your use. > > Yes, all three of them fill my requirments. The problem is that they > are not "standard" (for some definition of standard). You can not rely= > on them being present in OS libraries, you do not have a specification= > separated from the specific usage they were made for, etc. > > Thought experiment: if SSH did not exist (but HIP and PGP do) and you > were to create the protocol and write a RFC describing SSH. What would= > you use for host keys? Copy-and-paste from HIP RFCs? Using OpenPGP > keys as they are with a normative reference to RFC 4880? Clearly the real solution to this is: - RFC which documents this - A duo-licensed free (BSD-license) & commercially available toolkit/API layer that implements this functionality. - Marketing to IETF & developers. - Require IETF groups who have some kind of 'identity' to use this. Only with those four components can this work. Greets, Jeroen --------------enig5433730C60799ED27C1B1A75 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) iD8DBQFHzCyYKaooUjM+fCMRAmhhAKCJQ26h/0LOVFRFNdbfRCoJoMyIMwCdFpFw l1c0szmjv7ZMexHRy9pYoIo= =WF3f -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig5433730C60799ED27C1B1A75-- --===============1182484151== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss --===============1182484151==-- From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Mar 3 10:01:30 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A386428C26A; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:01:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.086 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.086 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.649, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, 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 ojbgDVqEyBMF; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:01:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A95528C14C; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:01:25 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7250628C14C for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:01:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com 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 rATDXzep63bK for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:01:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1:76:0:ffff:4834:7146]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D15C28C10A for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:01:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.16.100] ([24.216.132.197]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m23I10NW025775 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:01:07 -0800 Message-ID: <47CC3CC9.5090003@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:00:41 -0700 From: Dave Crocker User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Subject: Re: Machine Identity References: <20080226130527.GA1404@generic-nic.net> <47C45C52.8010705@dcrocker.net> <20080228164131.GD21463@nic.fr> <47C6F044.8000901@dcrocker.net> <20080303155244.GD22158@nic.fr> In-Reply-To: <20080303155244.GD22158@nic.fr> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/6094/Mon Mar 3 08:15:09 2008 on sbh17.songbird.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Mon, 03 Mar 2008 10:01:07 -0800 (PST) Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:32:52AM -0800, > Dave Crocker wrote >> The requirements you have provided mean that there must be a global, >> persistent registration service. > > No, I do not think so. Identifiers locally generated, at random, in a > large space (like SSH or OpenPGP keys or HIP Host Identifiers) are > OK. How are you going to do reputation-reporting with transient identitiers? How does the history develop on which a reputation will be based? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Mar 3 15:44:46 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 982C33A6C37; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:44:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.917 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.480, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, 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 yGMiVz7BOdmb; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:44:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9CB63A68FF; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:44:45 -0800 (PST) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1FF23A68FF for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:44:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com 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 2j+V-BtDB+7p for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:44:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:1:76:0:ffff:4834:7146]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FAE63A6E53 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:44:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.16.100] ([24.216.132.197]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m23Ni7oN003382 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:44:13 -0800 Message-ID: <47CC8D34.6040907@dcrocker.net> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:43:48 -0700 From: Dave Crocker User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeroen Massar Subject: Re: Machine Identity References: <20080226130527.GA1404@generic-nic.net> <47C45C52.8010705@dcrocker.net> <20080228164131.GD21463@nic.fr> <47C6E694.3070101@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> <47C6F112.4010503@dcrocker.net> <47C6F4D3.2070901@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <47C6F4D3.2070901@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92/6097/Mon Mar 3 12:58:29 2008 on sbh17.songbird.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:44:13 -0800 (PST) Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Jeroen Massar wrote: > DKIM indeed 'comes up' with a pub/priv keypair out of thin air, like > SSH. When you talk to the host again you do know that you are talking to > the same host and not a different one, but they are still anonymous. DKIM uses a registered domain name as its identier. (Indeed, that's where the public key is recorded.) The keypair are used only for the authentication step. Not identification and not authorization or reputation. The registered domain name is used for that. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Mar 17 15:19:01 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-apps-discuss-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7219E3A6E72; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:19:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 Vc+JAQrETu+y; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:19:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533243A6B59; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:19:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D183A6803 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:18:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com 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 aHW3FKXc67yU for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:18:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org (laweleka.osafoundation.org [204.152.186.98]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AA873A6B60 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:18:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C0721421FF; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:16:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new and clamav at osafoundation.org Received: from laweleka.osafoundation.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (laweleka.osafoundation.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rtwKxZPV820O; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (unknown [74.95.2.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by laweleka.osafoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75A6C142240; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:16:36 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Message-Id: <45CD0D74-1116-4CA0-8537-50780279B965@osafoundation.org> To: apps-discuss@ietf.org, Lisa Dusseault's Chairs Subject: Lisa's Apps Area Activity for Feb 2008 From: Lisa Dusseault Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:16:31 -0700 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0581362365==" Sender: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org --===============0581362365== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-2--148274667 --Apple-Mail-2--148274667 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Notes - IDN BOF had a few consensus calls for specific changes to the charter; discussions ongoing at idna-update@alvestrand.no - ESDS BOF resulted in general sense that there were interesting problems in IETF's area, but no charter specifics yet and some confusion over models - Apps Discuss mailing list moved to apps-discuss@ietf.org - see bottom for WG quick notes Document Status and Progress Active Documents: my action - draft-ietf-lemonade-msgevent (Proposed Standard): I need to review - draft-monrad-sipping-3gpp-urn-namespace (Informational): I need to review - draft-klensin-rfc2821bis (Draft Standard): 2nd IETF Last Call is over, conferring with authors - draft-ellermann-news-nntp-uri (Proposed Standard): IETF Last Call finished, I need to do writeup Stalled, in review, waiting on other: - draft-ietf-eai-dsn (Experimental): In IETF Last Call - draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto: IETF Last Call - draft-ietf-sieve-body (Proposed Standard): DISCUSS from Tim Polk is probably resolved -- Tim will review - draft-adolf-dvb-urn (Informational): Needs new version to address incomplete information about URN resolution - draft-snell-atompub-bidi (Proposed Standard): author waiting on some implementation feedback - draft-ietf-imapext-sort (Proposed Standard) : In IESG Evaluation (3/27 telechat) - draft-wilde-sms-uri (Proposed Standard): Author considering what to do about overlap with tel URIs. Finished Processing -- new in RFC Ed queue and new RFCs - draft-evain-ebu-urn (Informational): Approved, announcement to be sent - draft-ietf-imapext-i18n (Proposed Standard): Approved, announcement to be sent - draft-goodwin-iso-urn (Informational): Approved, waiting until post-holiday processing to enter RFC queue - draft-creed-ogc-urn (Informational): Approved, in RFC Ed queue - draft-ietf-sieve-notify ( Proposed Standard): Approved, in RFC Ed queue - draft-ietf-sieve-notify-xmpp: Approved, in RFC Ed queue - draft sjdcox-cgi-urn (Information): Approved, in RFC Ed queue - RFC5234 or STD 0068 (Standard): Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF WG Status CALSIFY: closing down issues with RFC2446bis. HTTPBIS: did not meet. Tracking and resolving issues (high-water mark: issue # 108), based on Roy Fielding's major reorganization of HTTP into 7 dependent documents. Publication of HTTP Security doc. IMAPEXT: Did not meet. Waiting for last documents to clear IESG Evaluation. SIEVE: Discussing possible recharter for new work, now that major work items are or are becoming RFCs. USEFOR: No activity. --Apple-Mail-2--148274667 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
=A0- IDN BOF had a few consensus = calls for specific changes to the charter; discussions ongoing at idna-update@alvestrand.no
=A0- ESDS BOF resulted in general sense that there = were interesting problems in IETF's area, but no charter specifics yet = and some confusion over models
=A0- Apps = Discuss mailing list moved to apps-discuss@ietf.org=A0
=A0- see bottom for WG quick notes

Document = Status and Progress

Active Documents: my action
=A0-=A0draft-ietf-lemonade-msgevent (Proposed = Standard): I need to review
=A0- = draft-monrad-sipping-3gpp-urn-namespace (Informational): I need to = review

Stalled, = in review, waiting on other:
=A0- draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto: IETF Last = Call=A0
=A0-=A0draft-ietf-sieve-body = (Proposed Standard): DISCUSS from Tim Polk is probably resolved -- Tim = will review
=A0-=A0draft-adolf-dvb-urn = (Informational): Needs new version to address incomplete information = about URN resolution
=A0-=A0draft-snell-atompub-bi= di (Proposed Standard): author waiting on some implementation = feedback
=A0-=A0draft-ietf-imapext-sort = (Proposed Standard) : In IESG Evaluation (3/27 telechat)
=A0-=A0draft-wilde-sms-uri (Proposed Standard): = Author considering what to do about overlap with tel URIs.

Finished = Processing -- new in RFC Ed queue and new RFCs
=A0-=A0draft-evain-ebu-urn (Informational): = Approved, announcement to be sent
=A0- draft-ietf-sieve-notify ( = Proposed Standard): Approved, in RFC Ed queue
=A0- draft-ietf-sieve-notify-xmpp:=A0=A0Approved, in = RFC Ed queue
=A0- draft sjdcox-cgi-urn = (Information): Approved, in RFC Ed queue
=A0- = RFC5234 or STD 0068 (Standard):=A0=A0Augmented BNF for Syntax = Specifications: ABNF

WG Status
=A0 CALSIFY: = closing down issues with RFC2446bis.
=A0 HTTPBIS: = did not meet.=A0 Tracking and resolving issues (high-water mark: issue # = 108), based on Roy Fielding's major reorganization of HTTP into 7 = dependent documents.=A0 Publication of HTTP Security doc.
=A0 IMAPEXT: Did not meet.=A0 Waiting for last = documents to clear IESG Evaluation.
=A0 SIEVE: = Discussing possible recharter for new work, now that major work items = are or are becoming RFCs.
=A0 USEFOR: = No activity.=A0=A0

= --Apple-Mail-2--148274667-- --===============0581362365== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Apps-Discuss mailing list Apps-Discuss@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss --===============0581362365==--