From nobody Wed Aug 1 12:05:45 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BC5C130E18 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 12:05:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eCZack7ASCiD for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 12:05:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3436130E01 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 12:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0083689.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w71J555M014545 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:05:40 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0083689.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2kkhg8t0g3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 01 Aug 2018 15:05:40 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w71J5cAX012812 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:05:39 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [135.47.91.93]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w71J5W7b012297 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:05:33 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 9D9674048C3C for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 19:05:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAH.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.157]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 889574048C3A for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 19:05:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.5]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAH.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.157]) with mapi id 14.03.0408.000; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:05:32 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Babel at IETF Thread-Topic: information model open issues Thread-Index: AdQpvguYwHH3NQYTQdev//suP86yMQ== Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 19:05:31 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.248.158] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-08-01_07:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1808010192 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 19:05:44 -0000 I have some open issues that I'd like to make sure I get right. 1. Proposed description of babel-hello-mcast-history (and similar for -ucas= t-history) babel-hello-mcast-history: the multicast Hello history of whether or not th= e multicast Hello messages prior to babel-exp-mcast-hello-seqno were receiv= ed; representation of a binary sequence where the most recently received He= llo is expressed as a "1" placed in the left-most bit, with prior bits shif= ted right (and "0" bits placed between prior Hello bits and most recent Hel= lo for any not-received Hellos); represented as a string using utf-8 encode= d hex digits ([0-9a-fA-F]); note that this representation (supplied to a u= ser interface or transmitted across a management interface) is intended to = be a string representation of the stored binary value; see draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis section A.1 2. v4/v6 next hop addresses I think the proposal was to include route next hop ipv4 and ipv6 address pa= rameters in the neighbor table? These would be the next hop addresses used = for routes associated with this neighbor. I wanted to confirm I had that ri= ght. Add to neighbor object: [ip-address babel-next-hop-v4address;] [ip-address babel-next-hop-v6address;] babel-next-hop-v4address: the IPv4 address that will be used for any select= ed IPv4 route advertised by this neighbor babel-next-hop-v6address: the IPv6 address that will be used for any select= ed IPv6 route advertised by this neighbor 3. intervals -- what do the parameters mean and what actually makes sense t= o be able to represent as a parameter The model currently has the following interval parameters: interfaces: [int babel-mcast-hello-interval;] t= he current multicast hello interval in use for hellos sent on this interfac= e interfaces: [int babel-update-interval;] the c= urrent update interval in use for this interface neighbors: int babel-neighbor-ihu-interval; cu= rrent IHU interval for this neighbor neighbors: [int babel-ucast-hello-interval;] = the current unicast hello interval in use for hellos sent to this neighbor = on this interface Toke specifically asked about the babel-neighbor-ihu-interval. Given what T= oke said, I've been thinking.=20 All of these timer intervals are too ephemeral to be useful. I think they s= hould all go. But maybe instead of trying to track intervals, would it be possible to get= a count of hello, ihu, and update TLVs sent (multicast and unicast) -- kin= d of like the counts interfaces provide of Ethernet frames transmitted and = received? These counts are usually just started at boot and keep increasing= until something causes them to start over (like reboot, specific reset tri= gger, or reaching max value). This would have the advantage of being a real= statistic -- so we could claim the info model has the ability to provide s= tatistics. They would all be optional. I use the Ethernet frame counts ofte= n in troubleshooting: they tell me if the interface is receiving/transmitti= ng frames at all, and how frequently. Barbara From nobody Wed Aug 1 12:10:08 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1DF130E4C for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 12:10:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zHbBhAK7Be98 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 12:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F2F7130E01 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 12:10:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1533150602; bh=TcA8a70u8+xopbciqSq13eW0joEKENPvuB44U7jvtb0=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=vQJkY7s943lMU6ntJVG7KjfwNxcyucEhi3NYLNM0hAC1TX1l288rKSmatsk0akxCM nBPCB5gJy9tk9KmnQgxXuykCammm7laJkpe6vkiWB0yNHl2ADqnJ/kodaK8VQQXbQV XVu7hRDqkrnuJcZOD9BpEXS6j7dvLF6jMwQ5nxcawLTOLnoFeDh1y9SWWJj0OXSnnH iARm36msWXnMDe4cbu1WdOT0sffBYUIYaDg6dmt7Yv1zV9HvYSi3IeNVvTM1w+VTwW yUSmo4d1fnfFuOZm/CDEQ4SMVGScdwEKj4J8nCz313LYxPY+jVZILXaEXKURbgfv3V 38PLTMWIjrfkw== To: "STARK\, BARBARA H" , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 21:10:02 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87r2jhykc5.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 19:10:07 -0000 "STARK, BARBARA H" writes: > But maybe instead of trying to track intervals, would it be possible > to get a count of hello, ihu, and update TLVs sent (multicast and > unicast) -- kind of like the counts interfaces provide of Ethernet > frames transmitted and received? These counts are usually just started > at boot and keep increasing until something causes them to start over > (like reboot, specific reset trigger, or reaching max value). This > would have the advantage of being a real statistic -- so we could > claim the info model has the ability to provide statistics. They would > all be optional. I use the Ethernet frame counts often in > troubleshooting: they tell me if the interface is > receiving/transmitting frames at all, and how frequently. My immediate thought is that this sounds like a reasonable idea. Not sure I agree that (all) the timers should go, though... :) -Toke From nobody Wed Aug 1 15:48:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C3A9130E94 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:48:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aCCnoYIvhP3q for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:48:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E587130E85 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:48:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w71Ml4us024746; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 00:47:04 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0522DEB22D; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 00:47:55 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 5ip9QqqRaguO; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 00:47:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 41561EB200; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 00:47:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:47:52 +0200 Message-ID: <87600tsnzb.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:47:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B623868.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B623868.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B623868.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 22:48:03 -0000 > 2. v4/v6 next hop addresses > I think the proposal was to include route next hop ipv4 and ipv6 address parameters in the neighbor table? These would be the next hop addresses used for routes associated with this neighbor. I wanted to confirm I had that right. > Add to neighbor object: > [ip-address babel-next-hop-v4address;] > [ip-address babel-next-hop-v6address;] > babel-next-hop-v4address: the IPv4 address that will be used for any > selected IPv4 route advertised by this neighbor > babel-next-hop-v6address: the IPv6 address that will be used for any > selected IPv6 route advertised by this neighbor I suggest "any route advertised by that neighbour in the absence of an explicit next-hop TLV (See [RFC6126bis] Sections 4.6.8 and 4.6.9)." > All of these timer intervals are too ephemeral to be useful. I think they should all go. I'm not sure. The protocol leaves a lot of latitude wrt. sending all of these kinds of packets, but actual implementetions tend to follow a regular schedule augmented with occasional triggered updates. These values are intended to reflecct the regular schedule. > But maybe instead of trying to track intervals, would it be possible to > get a count of hello, ihu, and update TLVs sent (multicast and > unicast) -- kind of like the counts interfaces provide of Ethernet > frames transmitted and received? That's an excellent idea if these values are read-only. It's not useful if they are meant to be read-write. (I can envision a node that decreases its Hello interval when it becomes mobile, and increases its interval when it becomes fixed. Is that a legitimate application of a management interface?) -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Aug 2 05:57:52 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CC14130E55 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 05:57:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0WHr7NhUxzNa for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 05:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CF4130E39 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 05:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049295.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w72CtTpx018778; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 08:57:47 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2kks7dgca0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 02 Aug 2018 08:57:47 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w72CvjIf025422; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 08:57:45 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [135.47.91.189]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w72Cvgqf025382; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 08:57:42 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 6D8B340002B1; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:57:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.155]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 5B16B40002A5; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:57:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.5]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.155]) with mapi id 14.03.0408.000; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 08:57:41 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Juliusz Chroboczek'" CC: Babel at IETF Thread-Topic: [babel] information model open issues Thread-Index: AdQpvguYwHH3NQYTQdev//suP86yMQATSk8AABSHJmA= Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:57:41 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6390D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87600tsnzb.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87600tsnzb.wl-jch@irif.fr> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.244.33] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-08-02_03:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1808020135 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 12:57:50 -0000 > > All of these timer intervals are too ephemeral to be useful. I think th= ey > should all go. >=20 > I'm not sure. The protocol leaves a lot of latitude wrt. sending all of = these > kinds of packets, but actual implementetions tend to follow a regular > schedule augmented with occasional triggered updates. These values are > intended to reflecct the regular schedule. >=20 > > But maybe instead of trying to track intervals, would it be possible > > to get a count of hello, ihu, and update TLVs sent (multicast and > > unicast) -- kind of like the counts interfaces provide of Ethernet > > frames transmitted and received? >=20 > That's an excellent idea if these values are read-only. It's not useful = if they > are meant to be read-write. >=20 > (I can envision a node that decreases its Hello interval when it becomes > mobile, and increases its interval when it becomes fixed. Is that a legi= timate > application of a management interface?) OK. So Toke also says it may not be reasonable to get rid of all the interv= al parameters. But it sounds like adding some statistics may be good, too. I checked, and all the intervals were already defined as read-only. Statist= ics (counts) are always read-only. So I think we're ok on that front. [IMO: The beauty of Babel is its lack of need for configuration -- an imple= mentation should automatically adjust to changes in link characteristics. T= hese parameters can be used in troubleshooting and debugging; the correct a= ction after identifying undesirable behavior is a new revision of the imple= mentation for improved automatic adjustment to changes in conditions and no= t manual tweaking.] What intervals make sense to be able to report? It sounds like ones that are simply a reaction to (or the value of) an inte= rval sent by a neighbor do not make sense. I think that would get rid of th= e babel-neighbor-ihu-interval that Toke initially challenged. But maybe it makes sense to keep the (optional) Hello interval parameters (= multicast and unicast)? What about the update interval? Barbara From nobody Thu Aug 2 12:26:20 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 847C0127B92 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:26:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yIkeuHgiaJDe for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:26:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67CF81277C8 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 12:26:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1533237974; bh=4/OHBghef1xL7X0/d3xUZWq1rYKLC/RaYAmbZxOF2oM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=yIoPDfzQLP8g68ZAzyqWYxjZ2CedW7SLdR4ePSFy+GGareT4mLrdryJAeMOJ967v2 rd2lWO2SyOt9gaqchJ5wM7Bd+R+jcvnTqznl55Ygs38XKmo9sYVY6+xF0JNOQDr5Wx XP+uTTMKgwhBieD0N6xNUxta0YefMpheJ8BvKVtzoH8/fvjE1WQELopZLJ0bcKAWEt AnrtwSr+mKN0n7fDKBF8k0a1go6i4QCEZYPFaXcg14q4G8jR7DInqGTHtjS/symxqG QOSfXDbeprIFxwRvo1XZ6pNEhoqwcP3A3EXC6ydPc50WWR2/5hYwLaUIhTlnXI8AnI 0AcjPOlfuhqIw== To: "STARK\, BARBARA H" , 'Juliusz Chroboczek' Cc: Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6390D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87600tsnzb.wl-jch@irif.fr> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6390D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 21:26:11 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87o9eky3ho.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 19:26:18 -0000 "STARK, BARBARA H" writes: > What intervals make sense to be able to report? > It sounds like ones that are simply a reaction to (or the value of) an > interval sent by a neighbor do not make sense. I think that would get > rid of the babel-neighbor-ihu-interval that Toke initially challenged. > But maybe it makes sense to keep the (optional) Hello interval > parameters (multicast and unicast)? > What about the update interval? Both Hello and Update intervals are configurable in Bird, which to me implies that reporting the current values in the information model is probably worthwhile :) -Toke From nobody Thu Aug 2 14:12:35 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2E43130E29 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:12:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qKI4gwLJGtms for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:12:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58F3E130E20 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:12:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049297.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w72L6Ogq021703; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:12:31 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2km88qj4wx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 02 Aug 2018 17:12:31 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w72LCUe4020164; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:12:30 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [135.47.91.189]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w72LCPbZ020071; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:12:26 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id AF5E74014663; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 21:12:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.155]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 9E38A4014661; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 21:12:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.5]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.155]) with mapi id 14.03.0408.000; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:12:25 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27Toke_H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen=27?= , "'Juliusz Chroboczek'" CC: Babel at IETF Thread-Topic: [babel] information model open issues Thread-Index: AdQpvguYwHH3NQYTQdev//suP86yMQATSk8AABSHJmAAFrhEgAAE2p0A Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 21:12:24 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6411E@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87600tsnzb.wl-jch@irif.fr> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6390D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87o9eky3ho.fsf@toke.dk> In-Reply-To: <87o9eky3ho.fsf@toke.dk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.244.33] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-08-02_05:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=762 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1808020207 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 21:12:35 -0000 > > What intervals make sense to be able to report? > > It sounds like ones that are simply a reaction to (or the value of) an > > interval sent by a neighbor do not make sense. I think that would get > > rid of the babel-neighbor-ihu-interval that Toke initially challenged. > > But maybe it makes sense to keep the (optional) Hello interval > > parameters (multicast and unicast)? > > What about the update interval? >=20 > Both Hello and Update intervals are configurable in Bird, which to me imp= lies > that reporting the current values in the information model is probably > worthwhile :) Cool. Do you make them configurable per interface, or globally? I see that = it is possible to send Updates by unicast. If an implementation were to sup= port this, would it make sense for Update intervals to be configurable per = neighbor? Or would an interface Update interval still be sufficient for all= ? Barbara From nobody Thu Aug 2 14:24:31 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56D9B130E20 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:24:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id awsQitljELXD for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:24:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62F74130DDD for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 14:24:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1533245066; bh=DgITjZdOYXO0mWLXXFf1nzl4fsu2arKMB7eBCI7vQiQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=aow7mtUZfV6BjJSFGpx5c72U4yOQ3S4mlPTJOl7C7YLSi0g+cIZGx8S4OpND0ZuKG BROwvIK578/x/uywTxYrej+jtSqgPnR2mKBqYQSmt3uqZa/xVSrdWpIU9oa5k7MwxR MgkMw2tmUx/D13oURy/2Wkmjw5rstEqG7v9hfOdFfqN43Svh2I19V7y/XCLMDAcyEn wZ/OjnCB4jS4E8Lc7/2WesnL4u4cvYiRBac7cm0aVdi2wlgjl1IImMKvDKzGY/g9k7 JNfBYbc7Nc8UYRzbM1Ywxq/rmrVmEfUbCIJuStliWyeYOPF/BFSqUnyTecig6hqrDM BBwbIrs+kWEHQ== To: "STARK\, BARBARA H" , 'Juliusz Chroboczek' Cc: Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6411E@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87600tsnzb.wl-jch@irif.fr> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6390D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87o9eky3ho.fsf@toke.dk> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6411E@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 23:24:27 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <874lgcxy0k.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 21:24:30 -0000 "STARK, BARBARA H" writes: >> > What intervals make sense to be able to report? >> > It sounds like ones that are simply a reaction to (or the value of) an >> > interval sent by a neighbor do not make sense. I think that would get >> > rid of the babel-neighbor-ihu-interval that Toke initially challenged. >> > But maybe it makes sense to keep the (optional) Hello interval >> > parameters (multicast and unicast)? >> > What about the update interval? >> >> Both Hello and Update intervals are configurable in Bird, which to me implies >> that reporting the current values in the information model is probably >> worthwhile :) > > Cool. Do you make them configurable per interface, or globally? Per interface. > I see that it is possible to send Updates by unicast. If an > implementation were to support this, would it make sense for Update > intervals to be configurable per neighbor? Or would an interface > Update interval still be sufficient for all? Hmm, I'm not sure I can come up with a reason why that would be useful? -Toke From nobody Fri Aug 3 02:57:19 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87836130EC4 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 02:57:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iu3LsV0unhTX for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 02:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E04C130E3E for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 02:57:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w739uCA9013129 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:56:12 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w739uRl1031336; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:56:28 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99DBEEB279; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:57:02 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id ioELBFMcGe5l; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:57:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 19B16EB22D; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:57:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2018 11:56:59 +0200 Message-ID: <8736vvwz6c.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: "STARK, BARBARA H" , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <874lgcxy0k.fsf@toke.dk> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE63655@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87600tsnzb.wl-jch@irif.fr> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6390D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <87o9eky3ho.fsf@toke.dk> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE6411E@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <874lgcxy0k.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Fri, 03 Aug 2018 11:56:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Fri, 03 Aug 2018 11:56:28 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B6426BC.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B6426CB.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B6426BC.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B6426CB.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B6426BC.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B6426CB.002 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] information model open issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2018 09:57:11 -0000 >>> Both Hello and Update intervals are configurable in Bird, >> Cool. Do you make them configurable per interface, or globally? > Per interface. Same thing in babeld. (There's also a global value, but it's only used to configure interfaces that don't have specific values configured.) (As to IHUs, babeld dynamically computes an interval from the Hello interval and the estimated loss rate.) -- Juliusz From nobody Fri Aug 3 11:14:23 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA5413108F; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:14:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 80GEekgbrkte; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:14:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x230.google.com (mail-io0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9F8D130DCD; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:14:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x230.google.com with SMTP id g11-v6so5723703ioq.9; Fri, 03 Aug 2018 11:14:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q+5Wqh3eLngH5cSevETYJVV8ji+I2vpWovY3niHT/sY=; b=iHsyTNON9cHoSAqaUtFRDQb3XIfUvxsTqmRVgUu8GbN2JY4LIZFjoR08J75fHHE5o9 bzTt8mDYS65dKnz0dJ7vL3Nf0gjFgBMLBnyv5TkOL5EDRjv25McdVWe+N1wiQEBN+5eD Cg7Epi9Re//enPjI/8+esmZr+MlcTVLSGNPUYiDZAmDzWuQnqrqVq1RtNKDNilbMNdBB BJugTDQu2717/gN4JYiuJ6LWLjxIl2m5w49uE/17sKby0i6AVi/yrERQXCrvdvb5DhOT Rf8Y8pCBbKvPc9g0fNyVYVSY47clpEsQzq81gM/4bRkt7x+riCCr4zxM7guXcOlMKTrX wwOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q+5Wqh3eLngH5cSevETYJVV8ji+I2vpWovY3niHT/sY=; b=n8YClSItoGwsM4Rx+4w27oHWmMCiK7ax64PO9WS/n9vvwl4Z3lXJVk3fRP19yeSCrd KzwCyNgfrHlnna6oHu4wTeDCDYzRR5iDdSYYL2S+qKqtjBxE1Yb/s/StPdrkcO9ydNtk oyJ/KVBbZMDjiPfWmJkOFqNvh3Q8RAPhIXsy2yQ8SgFMEwCt7K39/QK+pkkBrKH6cThT bcO+lB4WBOW6+9OZHilvgIILkSsx2oviZBXT4S3pzq7pyB+qK1fN72iR4Nr5R1FzFO6B uy8eJwyEVoNWeiQ5wa5W32wu8W86kg5BNR6kBahJ0e3N1kMAGg5D5lMrAFhpQqi1to8O 5mFA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFOmk1poF2wLj7H8/FQDDvoz/qkZs2X6NdVvZMkhbO7doNbDF9j cRL1tIMdLH8pblBvEFrDuRXfXOOyEI7OgehuFwW1yhQG X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPz2Z0ifde8l5k8wM5JHOib472B5NQ/LZi3VLvuoVNMMocQEl/DWKhJ62I3Bth7RnfDCpi9YLrrbAok9XXVj5JM= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:343:: with SMTP id 64-v6mr7423617iod.66.1533320059798; Fri, 03 Aug 2018 11:14:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:14:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 14:14:04 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Draft Babel minutes uploaded X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2018 18:14:22 -0000 Hi, Draft minutes of the Babel WG meeting last month in Montreal have been uploaded to the meeting materials site. See https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/session/babel Corrections/comments welcome. Thanks to Barbara Stark and Gabriel Kerneis for doing these. Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Sun Aug 5 15:00:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01F7C1310BE; Sun, 5 Aug 2018 15:00:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8TbG0JLEH2jY; Sun, 5 Aug 2018 14:59:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E64A130E3A; Sun, 5 Aug 2018 14:59:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1533506392; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=3633; bh=2shUoMeRUDxgIOvTrkFCZD2eR0Q5wMZ5G6OOacIyotk=; b=mz960RowhYCu5ImkbsSPPRIPbg/EYPiSu9CisT5s/sMVgJ7ppb8CRfQJBa+NXQV2 Kj3HyBivqfuAM5XeMFqEcfwt5yXSa6K3KOdJd+vBlBlCPv42A6YxIdNmkM4pwexBPxE RxN+KOFfCr3HuGkTQ4wsVXhj+j8yQpKno6bD4VHw= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1533506391522500.53159323921557; Sun, 5 Aug 2018 14:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2018 22:59:51 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: "Babel at IETF" , Message-ID: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2018 22:00:00 -0000 ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:37 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. I object to the adoption of this document for the following reasons, which should be well-known to anybody who has been on the Babel WG mailing list, but if it takes to rub it in to action, I will rub it in. 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. The document lists Clara Do as its first author. Clara Do has never ever sent a single message, at all, however short or long, to the Babel WG mailing list. She has never presented anything at a Babel WG meeting, whether in person or remotely. In other words, this person has never participated in this working group. The document lists Weronika Kolodziejak as its second author. Weronika had sent 1 (one) message to the Babel WG mailing list, but made no other contributions (in the IETF sense of the term). The document lists Juliusz Chroboczek as its third author. Juliusz in the past couple months had sent an incredible amount of messages to the Babel WG mailing list. Most of those were related to the HMAC-based method of Babel security, which the Babel WG had already decided it will not use. Despite the obvious fact, Juliusz kept bringing the matter up again and again and again and again, most of the text in the proposed document has been committed by him, and at IETF-102 he proposed to adopt this draft shortly after it was first created. This way, the document looks mainly a product of very recent efforts of Juliusz Chroboczek. Hence when Juliusz at IETF-102 in his HMAC slides stated "I am just the janitor here", that statement was false. Juliusz Chroboczek had previously commented that Clara Do and Weronika Kolodziejak are his interns. I understand this as they are not independent in their actions, so as a minimum it would be fair to let them speak freely for themselves and to confirm the reasons for appearing on the list of authors for a document that was written mostly by another person. It would also be very useful to hear about their experience in the areas of network protocols design, implementation and security, and how much time they plan to spend on this project, as this is a Standards Track work and it may be very demanding regardless of what other plans people have in life. 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solved before? The Babel WG has already had an opportunity to adopt a HMAC-based solution to fulfill the requirements of its charter, and the WG decided not to adopt. This decision was not rooted in the technical merits of the proposed solution. As far as the WG adoption call materials go, draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis was good enough and had no unaddressed technical issues, I had already clarified this before. I had asked, twice, Juliusz Chroboczek about the technical merits of his new HMAC project, and, unfortunately, he had not provided an answer that would be sound and true. Given this input, I have to conclude this document does _not_ solve a problem that would not be solved already. I am sorry to have to raise issues like this instead of the actual technical points, but the Babel WG, the Homenet WG (which has a dependency on Babel) and the IETF deserve to have true and accurate information about the documents proposed for Standards Track work. -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Mon Aug 6 04:09:38 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2DDF130EB7; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 04:09:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F0WJALvvIPgj; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 04:09:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89FC4130DE2; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 04:09:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1533553767; bh=tYoTW6K9bI3064Y20C2oEyriZeCiIZ/RBV+vGhJGzcI=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=g30gdwoMPHBuEiAJ3KUOaPbKatO22FQkA5sdAH69UTaVKKnacPHa/k8iKwOcYpmrg diTIlvB8RUlTeSp8kkf/eIMXLnurXIto5kqitRQgEiJLwAfnxudiSv8QpCydVv3fEy JKxLdQoXtryfOR+ENeY0x/bnwD34dQvXKy3qIyuSeahY1v4m6iAuVOwmUV7Qev6pZY L9X69efJ9EmKbvSbPl8YkKZbyISeQf3FaOG+Xq6Ywgp8J6VK3T/MtKFzSyLp8hajAV jshzfsxkhKfSH3x1OGdLmGk1b7Kb8U9+jtJUNFddgxk9XHfoKfCJGdJhiGEHaLTVGR tm+o7m2RNA5jw== To: Denis Ovsienko , Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 13:09:32 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87d0uvwy37.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 11:09:38 -0000 Denis Ovsienko writes: > ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:37 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > > welcome. > > I object to the adoption of this document for the following reasons, > which should be well-known to anybody who has been on the Babel WG > mailing list, but if it takes to rub it in to action, I will rub it > in. > > 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. This point basically amounts to (attempted) character assassination of the draft authors, which is totally unwarranted, has no place in an IETF working group discussion and is, frankly, shameful. As such, I am just going to ignore this point. > 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solved before? > > The Babel WG has already had an opportunity to adopt a HMAC-based > solution to fulfill the requirements of its charter, and the WG > decided not to adopt. The working group has made no statement on whether or not an HMAC-based security solution is appropriate for Babel (in general). The only thing that has happened is that draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis failed to garner sufficient support for adoption. And now a second draft has been proposed, which the chairs have deemed to be sufficiently different from the previous one to warrant a separate call for adoption. Just as it would have been possible to issue a second adoption call for a revised version of draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis, if such a version had been proposed. Personally, I think HMAC is an excellent security solution for Babel, which is why I have expressed my support for adopting this draft (just as I supported adopting draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis, as you may recall). > I am sorry to have to raise issues like this instead of the actual > technical points, Yeah, as you say, none of the points you made above are technical; as such I fail to see how they have any relevance to the WG decision on whether to adopt draft-do-babel-hmac. -Toke From nobody Mon Aug 6 13:24:48 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B5F130E58; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 13:24:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oRmj1msO1GzL; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 13:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x232.google.com (mail-it0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C220130E05; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 13:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x232.google.com with SMTP id h20-v6so20000477itf.2; Mon, 06 Aug 2018 13:24:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MhmanMzMh6oWGIHp2ON6iSMJzq42xrCU7B7Ks1+Dgbs=; b=JWgbi8fGkzurhUV7OmQYIDxGT0qaBjsbEuiKVPejX/9OBBttDGE9SWjdzJPHL2rlRU xzxCrJpwOq+uzpDot34Xg/V8PrA4pPZkzSu9b/9C0Mq/xCyfVvh51WARKNQYGSInad30 EscNvtbwcNvLV/TqmKp4d1LmdB45YvaxYPi1StYIeOxjH0+0wUrASBainGhQxul9/kx5 cPpyuTYNEQfamaB8byMQ2BWDqIez3vrzRBBPGyv98mxmqdVLCjPeOd9ivup/3Q0uKSsn WiRLn9fUKwxaWZ4rhx3Q4RkZjoa4UA6agDHt1gfUgTDiDsERd4pXtXgOkQr0FCkqyvfZ bpTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MhmanMzMh6oWGIHp2ON6iSMJzq42xrCU7B7Ks1+Dgbs=; b=mPcM639TiMA4MnVsTWfeSgOueG2CcJDNTGdu4co7V6xBUWW9RdU9Di/v0cnu39mCgB ZM8+t1f+nDSqstlhj/CyvA74atBoB1LYphnJSZz5TKIid78ZvN47vgZI0cZTt6t5gdSZ DZsqZ8qdtZ/s9Vx9HmRw57dUxlksXVAblYMYbrHBXUlXJgLG0lrOP6SNW8WGhAfpA7js cw2DilSO+TU7aDQrisqJmoi7ulz51DT9eKcpygzatTppQ8RDj/IPuGk7B6ThJoihjxOE eE7CMMSiaAI8Hn/jOgutD8ftuwyQHQnlAqPXcTVCpdbjIHioq+k2yAvOTrwxwODbcnIe DdXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFtCPdXgMXjtXyy0G2gJ+3fENSy/T4299wcnyQ1+A4NPooELyEo gtTpRYYu/jOejyglfFxgaF8Jta2Z7OWW40s2rlvntBbh X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpc8g/dD/6+uf3ySeJkNAvMOZvvoE2dKTp3idFJyHRdsmjxE6VfbsQ+vsJlZ4A/EHO4o7B05MFvMrjoWoJ+6B4Q= X-Received: by 2002:a24:da47:: with SMTP id z68-v6mr15746278itg.59.1533587084295; Mon, 06 Aug 2018 13:24:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 13:24:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 16:24:28 -0400 Message-ID: To: Denis Ovsienko Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 20:24:47 -0000 Hi Denis, Thanks for responding to this WG draft adoption call. On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: > ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:37 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > > welcome. > > I object to the adoption of this document for the following reasons, whic= h should be well-known to anybody who has been on the Babel WG mailing list= , but if it takes to rub it in to action, I will rub it in. > > 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. > > The document lists Clara Do as its first author. Clara Do has never ever = sent a single message, at all, however short or long, to the Babel WG maili= ng list. She has never presented anything at a Babel WG meeting, whether in= person or remotely. In other words, this person has never participated in = this working group. > > The document lists Weronika Kolodziejak as its second author. Weronika ha= d sent 1 (one) message to the Babel WG mailing list, but made no other cont= ributions (in the IETF sense of the term). A person who has produced text with the intent that it end up in a Babel Internet Draft and that actually ends up in such an Internet Draft, even if in an edited form, is a contributor to the WG and a participant in the WG. > The document lists Juliusz Chroboczek as its third author. Juliusz in the= past couple months had sent an incredible amount of messages to the Babel = WG mailing list. Most of those were related to the HMAC-based method of Bab= el security, I'll take the above statements as true although I haven't actually checked who posted how often. > which the Babel WG had already decided it will not use.= Despite the obvious fact, Juliusz kept bringing the matter up again and ag= ain and again and again, most of the text in the proposed document has been= committed by him, and at IETF-102 he proposed to adopt this draft shortly = after it was first created. I don't think that the Babel WG has decided it will not use HMAC-based Babel security. It also seems reasonable that, considering how long previous documents have been available and how much discussion has been held on the topic, that a new HMAC-based Babel security document could be considered fairly quickly. > This way, the document looks mainly a product of very recent efforts of J= uliusz Chroboczek. Hence when Juliusz at IETF-102 in his HMAC slides stated= "I am just the janitor here", that statement was false. I'm not sure what being "the janitor" means. Also, while there is some correlation, I don't think how much someone has contributed to a document can be determined by how often they posted to the mailing list or did commits. It seems reasonable that someone could produce major contributions to a document by reading previous documents and reading the comments on the mailing list. To the extent that "janitor" means someone who cleans things up, it seems reasonable that such contributions might go through someone who cleaned up some minor formatting or language issued before merging the contribution into a document -- but, of course, I don't actually know what the work flow was and I don't think you do either. So I just don't see any foundation for your claim that Juliusz's statement was false and I think that statement was inappropriate. > Juliusz Chroboczek had previously commented that Clara Do and Weronika Ko= lodziejak are his interns. I understand this as they are not independent in= their actions, so as a minimum it would be fair to let them speak freely f= or themselves and to confirm the reasons for appearing on the list of autho= rs for a document that was written mostly by another person. If they want to post something to the mailing list, they are welcome to do so, but there is no requirement for them to. Until the draft is adopted by the WG, the WG has no authority over the author list shown on the title page. > It would also be very useful to hear about their experience in the areas = of network protocols design, implementation and security, and how much time= they plan to spend on this project, as this is a Standards Track work and = it may be very demanding regardless of what other plans people have in life= . Well, I don't recall anyone else posting a resume to the list. I know I hav= en't. > 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solved before? > > The Babel WG has already had an opportunity to adopt a HMAC-based solutio= n to fulfill the requirements of its charter, and the WG decided not to ado= pt. This decision was not rooted in the technical merits of the proposed so= lution. As far as the WG adoption call materials go, draft-ovsienko-babel-r= fc7298bis was good enough and had no unaddressed technical issues, I had al= ready clarified this before. Adoption of the draft was determined not to have consensus due to insufficient support and one objection. > I had asked, twice, Juliusz Chroboczek about the technical merits of his = new HMAC project, and, unfortunately, he had not provided an answer that wo= uld be sound and true. Given this input, I have to conclude this document d= oes _not_ solve a problem that would not be solved already. The WG has the right to choose which draft will be the starting point for the WG draft efforts. Thanks, Donald =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com > I am sorry to have to raise issues like this instead of the actual techni= cal points, but the Babel WG, the Homenet WG (which has a dependency on Bab= el) and the IETF deserve to have true and accurate information about the do= cuments proposed for Standards Track work. > > -- > Denis Ovsienko From nobody Tue Aug 7 03:59:44 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D19D130EB2; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 03:59:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MZ1ffoBj4Opp; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 03:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12723130E55; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 03:59:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1533639575; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=8134; bh=aoEforPIhmBXvSbHFXGAcJ932VzlaxAm0Kl/2rBt2HI=; b=J1JmXv30LgCScfAU53S8zeNz+fqkTNzWjN8DVwx52a8l/pSt1CVm+Ik6EGC+GoUO YfpzQyt9kr5AFuhYf3narnk95PNBjBRyB/somIgFyE5w6mAt4i1cClbtU/bWASzsLD3 9xjfkbopYJN31I38A/krUWdTUlNQVMQnJw09wbPg= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1533639573052636.0186214453016; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 03:59:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 11:59:33 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: , "Babel at IETF" Message-ID: <165140abe3b.cf1cc955191064.7082979724932704408@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:59:42 -0000 Thank you for a detailed response Donald. I have commented on the points that look the most pressing to me. ---- On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 21:24:28 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > Hi Denis, > > Thanks for responding to this WG draft adoption call. > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: > > ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:37 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > > > welcome. > > > > I object to the adoption of this document for the following reasons, which should be well-known to anybody who has been on the Babel WG mailing list, but if it takes to rub it in to action, I will rub it in. > > > > 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. > > > > The document lists Clara Do as its first author. Clara Do has never ever sent a single message, at all, however short or long, to the Babel WG mailing list. She has never presented anything at a Babel WG meeting, whether in person or remotely. In other words, this person has never participated in this working group. > > > > The document lists Weronika Kolodziejak as its second author. Weronika had sent 1 (one) message to the Babel WG mailing list, but made no other contributions (in the IETF sense of the term). > > A person who has produced text with the intent that it end up in a > Babel Internet Draft and that actually ends up in such an Internet > Draft, even if in an edited form, is a contributor to the WG and a > participant in the WG. > > > The document lists Juliusz Chroboczek as its third author. Juliusz in the past couple months had sent an incredible amount of messages to the Babel WG mailing list. Most of those were related to the HMAC-based method of Babel security, > > I'll take the above statements as true although I haven't actually > checked who posted how often. > > > which the Babel WG had already decided it will not use. Despite the obvious fact, Juliusz kept bringing the matter up again and again and again and again, most of the text in the proposed document has been committed by him, and at IETF-102 he proposed to adopt this draft shortly after it was first created. > > I don't think that the Babel WG has decided it will not use HMAC-based > Babel security. It also seems reasonable that, considering how long > previous documents have been available and how much discussion has > been held on the topic, that a new HMAC-based Babel security document > could be considered fairly quickly. > > > This way, the document looks mainly a product of very recent efforts of Juliusz Chroboczek. Hence when Juliusz at IETF-102 in his HMAC slides stated "I am just the janitor here", that statement was false. > > I'm not sure what being "the janitor" means. Also, while there is some > correlation, I don't think how much someone has contributed to a > document can be determined by how often they posted to the mailing > list or did commits. It seems reasonable that someone could produce > major contributions to a document by reading previous documents and > reading the comments on the mailing list. To the extent that "janitor" > means someone who cleans things up, it seems reasonable that such > contributions might go through someone who cleaned up some minor > formatting or language issued before merging the contribution into a > document -- but, of course, I don't actually know what the work flow > was and I don't think you do either. So I just don't see any > foundation for your claim that Juliusz's statement was false and I > think that statement was inappropriate. I am sorry that you do not like the language I have to use, but I do not currently see better means to get to the point: who is the actual author(s) of draft-do-babel-hmac? This question is both appropriate and relevant. An author is the person responsible for the technical contents of the document. Who exactly is responsible for the technical contents of this routing protocol security mechanism proposed to be adopted for Standards Track work? Who exactly has the responsibility to answer the question in point 2 of this objection? Are you saying it is Juliusz? I have already asked him and got no sound technical answer. Are you saying it is Clara or Weronika? I am looking forward to study any comments they make, if they do. I appreciate your willingness to discuss what other participants could mean, but on this occasion I do not see other means to achieve clarity other than the participants speaking for themselves, rather than someone making interpretations on their behalf. > > Juliusz Chroboczek had previously commented that Clara Do and Weronika Kolodziejak are his interns. I understand this as they are not independent in their actions, so as a minimum it would be fair to let them speak freely for themselves and to confirm the reasons for appearing on the list of authors for a document that was written mostly by another person. > > If they want to post something to the mailing list, they are welcome > to do so, but there is no requirement for them to. Until the draft is > adopted by the WG, the WG has no authority over the author list shown > on the title page. > > > It would also be very useful to hear about their experience in the areas of network protocols design, implementation and security, and how much time they plan to spend on this project, as this is a Standards Track work and it may be very demanding regardless of what other plans people have in life. > > Well, I don't recall anyone else posting a resume to the list. I know I haven't. > > > 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solved before? > > > > The Babel WG has already had an opportunity to adopt a HMAC-based solution to fulfill the requirements of its charter, and the WG decided not to adopt. This decision was not rooted in the technical merits of the proposed solution. As far as the WG adoption call materials go, draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis was good enough and had no unaddressed technical issues, I had already clarified this before. > > Adoption of the draft was determined not to have consensus due to > insufficient support and one objection. > > > I had asked, twice, Juliusz Chroboczek about the technical merits of his new HMAC project, and, unfortunately, he had not provided an answer that would be sound and true. Given this input, I have to conclude this document does _not_ solve a problem that would not be solved already. > > The WG has the right to choose which draft will be the starting point > for the WG draft efforts. Thank you for providing the above comments, but they do not answer the question, so let me get back to the point again. Juliusz Chroboczek maintains that draft-do-babel-hmac addresses unresolved problems of my Babel security contributions. This statement is false by omission (Juliusz keeps comparing with RFC 7298, whereas he has seen that the input I had contributed during the adoption call of 7298bis I-D had addressed all known issues). Hence the two requests below. * I take repeated false statements about the quality of my contributions to the Babel WG as ongoing deliberate annoyance. I accept the chairs may be unaware because of not following the WG mailing list, but I do not see it as a valid reason for this annoyance to continue. Now I am asking the working group chairs to acknowledge this statement and to handle this annoyance within the scope of their powers and duties in IETF. * I am asking the person(s) responsible for the technical contents of draft-do-babel-hmac to answer the same crucial question. Which specific technical problems does this document solve that have not been solved before? -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Tue Aug 7 10:21:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 731E61310CA; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rcVcjHFa340E; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:20:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x234.google.com (mail-it0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E71C1310AB; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x234.google.com with SMTP id j81-v6so21316650ite.0; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:20:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=utS1pJslJv9Gn1HIrVAba5aHjMei+ZItWiPrqLen340=; b=sSoJmyeT1L6BB9B1uJHjWLgLv/8jTPKXNpixBrbNrl2hnS/oizkk/7M6BRdiNpaH73 WyRWDdHrOsoaVCjezTws4ZfbSfipdb/5waJkI71e2sEBs3FfjrlccldnodzOXXslu2MH NQ85BFcTyzksV3sb7ccHprFz0deTkoZxHq5JcfwPgI2+0iBHkjqtliWcyV9hKMRhmAvd a10bk0jfhXsmgz21wS72hCCxfzuhOrwGJ1njTtF+GQZFUYhRb0wmAroUkAfMdi/Ti1LC sX48WWFIvFahn1ugxP/MYEage3gKDxkprIn4H69hz6R5qHjdQhw1mL2nKbdder32saJT /BAQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=utS1pJslJv9Gn1HIrVAba5aHjMei+ZItWiPrqLen340=; b=G/25vqVSnUZ/9cFx+L4RcAvZGqAOac4ic9FWV5dixq72y1d5oE/Rk+c9Pn/wTY7Llc F3Ygn7S76zHFiUPbVN4EeQrE+6Y4m1c56ujU+/WMQ/EakDV5GLVZdUw2i6G5Dp/kuS5s raFmZXYX7d2jBYgUkeecyfHKGBeFIk4M9PPMTjvtF9LNrPf8MQ/RJvvdY5q3wu1zrH3r TdkkKfn+LPcnknxd7LNsGyA+LeqoCl3zJFJ982Upv/Xu3vEcVWt1EiAfKV+uZhQfvIHi ph5w3fZIdLaNXJOb23/cbEMa5JmB8P9uxEY8zWzEJLX7TEmaUEDXzQTUyBlHjZpCGYIJ 1P0g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlG2wlypeGO0JVHa7uumg5xPamZ6g1atdbhwbbgH+E8XP49+x+oJ 8K6KEE5YwfFHA+fqGSIywuTaptnBa8cTxnkKHlCueA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPxt1juPM1NFubNe9DM/wxkZgEPfV4wONOfbc9L1KAMHOMT+z7pdHKI+MX2SwShMecob0QflIpvqcbCfdNG1908= X-Received: by 2002:a24:da47:: with SMTP id z68-v6mr2569483itg.59.1533662445304; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:20:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:20:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 13:20:29 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] IPR Calls X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 17:21:02 -0000 Hi, In the Routing Area it is customary to do a call for any IPR declarations both when a draft is first adopted and later when it is in WG Last Call. We have been a bit remiss on this but plan to do so in the future. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Tue Aug 7 10:25:15 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D188130EE1; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:25:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NR8bjQNBjUCB; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:25:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x229.google.com (mail-io0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 659701277BB; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:25:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x229.google.com with SMTP id z20-v6so14689453iol.0; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:25:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3C1SC15sVWgJv1024x0vkenq3x+i8ZCJ7V3wb96Tp/c=; b=WvzhHivScEiHAcNjNwPFOJWkLB+7R9gKpMpSvI/txOWaM79qdwAyeDDs7E0s/+KhkQ zKZCqVhhJc+IFmWWXsjj6qyHgtaxMbbxSYY1E4c6ORPOUPb8EfGFxMTPspX3DKG5iiDt MTdTPKP0GCyR992fVjzJJIbRAUHLqfF1WOArTSC0oUhR6g9F/Lv3l1vrX0JRn1vvTip9 sA+u6Fq+ebjSXSbny/gu4mVWgSi3QxW7xBTh7iNSwbnTTedvuQH+ly5SA0J21dsZ3Vl6 AIJAyis8djZ4RZ7hVsAOOxrarBcjOncqrWkuMpndbqk5IvYkjsC4fwxbM5iCwU0cdXNv dTlA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3C1SC15sVWgJv1024x0vkenq3x+i8ZCJ7V3wb96Tp/c=; b=KH1PsZ9alLSz/JJ9LTNY6iPs0W4eh2JxVIso64lzuUfT3D7COtdRiaBJwu5p3k0RF0 p8YPeMh2PESNXTJzVXB8yvcrHXaHUgZVyDP9ux9ThUOETQVEdV+pr/O/W/1dw+NteZs6 7S+C2J+Wz7yGr+8xeOFf0Ek1yBTveO7CDq7hZedW8LqazaYlsR9nzk4JJAzvtcQXl3qz pt1J8rD9c5LhI7Eb6t0CgjdhETpTBMAjBfW5Zy2YcrwP774twDzso5JGCTwXK5rS5/rx OiOUwxFcRFsmLJuyqHhaMTuRhIgKNTzTwam0P2NesqbuxDAYSvg83OnaiD/If7N8HQEQ 6vnA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGNkXF12/tBHnCEusup+z/ZWcAQk6Yobskh92s6ywKcFQKFlI0a 0ARKaqoeyJVudQLedEj5xIsj3hpf4k0WQC5hDP18RA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPx4dKjdVsiAnCbjQ+jQeCcNkBRffy5mF4J7UEDUJZWDA9Ydqam8DL4aFmJSQ8VkfJ9J9Px2Gq+qzu8gsit2TZk= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:e403:: with SMTP id u3-v6mr5382753iog.131.1533662711520; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:25:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:24:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 13:24:56 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Adopted: WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 17:25:13 -0000 Based on the mailing list response, this draft is adopted by the BABEL WG. The authors should prepare and post a draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00. There were some suggestions for improvement posted during the call for adoption. I would recommend that the authors post a -00 as above with no changes other than those needed to make it a WG draft and then consider posting a -01 version incorporating some of the suggested improvements. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. > > Thanks, > Donald > =============================== > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Tue Aug 7 10:29:46 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E371B130EE1; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:29:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cL3vFokh4ehu; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x229.google.com (mail-it0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 089F91277BB; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x229.google.com with SMTP id j81-v6so21353400ite.0; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:29:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qpIsESnXm70WHwg28iN2trHJRjrI5/StoOgUNuZ7v7g=; b=By9/r/jwRzzosm9Eqp3BPNUwZSsqqoxskp7bwV5uMzN9K+EvYbdrUiz93OriEeU/zh esqtnbQuKcItmrmOI8dHhDJXRlYXZMwgSrbztmsPP3Sa9vMVy6MyNJrCr7KuDzeCwxyK JbQwiOQyVGGxCPQ89GHnGTKMJ7ln4f60LY1lq+uzGS5h6UOzIyhtj6lMrrdd0xocdzir ipUG2uxFjo40FMbGcmf0YV/tYPqrVAwq2ye4qtdf8A77k1JXIfhbMzOp/cg0YHnZYrpR YU36+nugH451xaIL1lkdLlTnu6gqQ4n85pVeKpqejAwMxMr0KApFdLsCuP3ro64XGXsq y1GA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qpIsESnXm70WHwg28iN2trHJRjrI5/StoOgUNuZ7v7g=; b=ByBNnlO19IgQtZ0trKhCsNn45oUlvG4TZC/Dqg1qq/we1aOvlq1abjp+eDj7kBDz7G lgBo6TlUpu2YNTJZc8vbBF2uFTaMLmR4/sdJDoE+FH8Frq1JE0mge1SBPfnrOGWejSfb X7jt2jZ7n5lDvQ2ojc6LceoyyQ8a2mR6OTW7NE5h5LFtWWmt5nYjSyLHpIsPUHLliLDu Jt/fecmBoWFm5O32UbzZmaFdMUsAWayxpKziWPdDDj6zLBfbjJ+U12KSnrBNGIcSQdNq qXTWR6KfmSlUIc1pgetSoBH0lDbL7celSk7kShJ9i/2nT5Ub9vI4eVIy5ytQfU5roRhm +Gdg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFhVW1mT+oOCOQcGKHiO3Epy4ingrlHKkgs/oLS9RS+BjUWZupJ 5E0zMwbp990x14RDujHnSpkZpxm6t7QprF38aOVh2Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPy0+MNDJf7/kOOjSEbVZ85SKQR5UjY5H0YAUZFhT9CmVOytuihUSK1nx4AYdfwufyci+JFdOrzhd8ZQgFa7+H8= X-Received: by 2002:a24:4444:: with SMTP id o65-v6mr2651736ita.94.1533662983096; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:29:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:29:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 13:29:27 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] IPR Call for draft-decimo/ietf-babel-dtls X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 17:29:45 -0000 Hi, This is a call for any IPR declaration for draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01. The authors must respond indicating whether they are personally aware of any IPR in this draft for which a declaration had not yet be filed with the IETF. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Tue Aug 7 11:10:40 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03831130E0F; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:10:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SLyBgO4DnJJ1; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:10:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E94012D7EA; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:10:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w77I9hQB025065; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 20:09:43 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF59EEB279; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 20:10:34 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 0oqA0p2W7-i4; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 20:10:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (public-gprs406146.centertel.pl [37.47.217.195]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21C61EB200; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 20:10:33 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 20:10:32 +0200 Message-ID: <87o9ee2gkn.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Denis Ovsienko Cc: "Babel at IETF" , In-Reply-To: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Tue, 07 Aug 2018 20:09:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B69E067.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B69E067.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B69E067.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 18:10:39 -0000 > 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. The document is signed by Clara Dô, Weronika Ko³odziejak and Juliusz Chroboczek. The interns are in alphabetical order, the supervisor is last, which is usually considered as the friendly way to sign a paper. I am very much suprised that I need to justify that. This is our common work, and I shall not remove Clara and Weronika from the list of authors. > 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solved before? The fatal flaw in rfc7298bis that is solved by draft-do-babel-hmac was explained in a mail to babel@ietf dated 10 May 2018 with message-id <87sh70wg5l.wl-jch@irif.fr>, archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/lIKV14o30A0gIxU6r35bUo5N0Rc . -- Juliusz From nobody Tue Aug 7 21:58:36 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F7E4130DD9; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 21:58:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OztjWcDOqd1z; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 21:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22a.google.com (mail-it0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46E49130DE1; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 21:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id e14-v6so1927985itf.1; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 21:58:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=V68cgdCm5+/3QxL1asOO/hMAs1kxEXhLRKJf2Mfimh4=; b=OVzkUDeEQLsXsBPwuMHr5ycDvOOMGuVH//Im59UEo4933GYZ/7m6gNjTq90rvWpdtP xd9TG0C3x2lqhC7BOoxkgYjBUnIOqeHEulXYW/Z4nA53eDqOdPqmWnCOBgWzBV0uO59Z TOA6wzDq+yQ/nqKPCrmJrSkVr+DtyCxbmnt7HZgXBpaqvHjtVzMRIIwDxaQ3xZylnqQM 4KkmmuBrniabDrrU1XNaAQmEvGtxCr/Zk3qnEBt6VmBSggUApbmmdByRo5KmutxOXa8v dpBzAflgOF71YEvlsFvj8cmnIV6TcGuIx3UOq4T+RKnoe7clX58zrUa27hAUKtaXrqkp B9nQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=V68cgdCm5+/3QxL1asOO/hMAs1kxEXhLRKJf2Mfimh4=; b=rpGtpFAiWEh21mgp9eNQBWNDS7toWQt/KjuXzlVoNg2YHIe7+eIT5FY30FDPK6o6Ue 2da3/g2VIHM47wBIrI29K65bV+3wyUXPT+Jv80Wii4EaALPqQoSXlOGfDUI7rKxaQLzf UA21g4FKGN+reEGVWB/rxxlzLbmxN4zcxiyopdx4+VXucMKBbPF6KU/RtMCHsyK+k7Ay +66k1gifIyzD1sTGsYQXBeRj3p0+czMEta4TV38x+JtIHGAKhXQOUNrjGW5wNQ6igsdI XMDxyscmi933RZKRt4hI5WEc+Jucu3lZehb4Ky52BzOUb1XRs916O+Ziklc6efunb3Na vKlQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlE1KRv8yFRP6eZX78+j8Teuoc3pZC7SEm8NHaWz/WU/zac8ZRa2 EwbxxF92eBLe5IraCO9Jlnzi53q6c30F/57UCYVWkA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPwIZCydyxxl1ORED6ZqFe1YQrS1hB8ByIFiuT2ixZ67DQGosbNUfKMAmOKBzUE1Jo+F932T7sTzN99ORe01ogQ= X-Received: by 2002:a24:4444:: with SMTP id o65-v6mr973122ita.94.1533704311331; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 21:58:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 21:58:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <165140abe3b.cf1cc955191064.7082979724932704408@ovsienko.info> References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> <165140abe3b.cf1cc955191064.7082979724932704408@ovsienko.info> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 00:58:15 -0400 Message-ID: To: Denis Ovsienko Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2018 04:58:35 -0000 Hi Denis, On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: > Thank you for a detailed response Donald. > > I have commented on the points that look the most pressing to me. > > ---- On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 21:24:28 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > Hi Denis, > > > > Thanks for responding to this WG draft adoption call. > > > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Denis Ovsienko w= rote: > > > ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:37 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > > > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether yo= u > > > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > > > > welcome. > > > > > > I object to the adoption of this document for the following reasons,= which should be well-known to anybody who has been on the Babel WG mailing= list, but if it takes to rub it in to action, I will rub it in. > > > > > > 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. > > > > > > The document lists Clara Do as its first author. Clara Do has never = ever sent a single message, at all, however short or long, to the Babel WG = mailing list. She has never presented anything at a Babel WG meeting, wheth= er in person or remotely. In other words, this person has never participate= d in this working group. > > > > > > The document lists Weronika Kolodziejak as its second author. Weroni= ka had sent 1 (one) message to the Babel WG mailing list, but made no other= contributions (in the IETF sense of the term). > > > > A person who has produced text with the intent that it end up in a > > Babel Internet Draft and that actually ends up in such an Internet > > Draft, even if in an edited form, is a contributor to the WG and a > > participant in the WG. > > > > > The document lists Juliusz Chroboczek as its third author. Juliusz i= n the past couple months had sent an incredible amount of messages to the B= abel WG mailing list. Most of those were related to the HMAC-based method o= f Babel security, > > > > I'll take the above statements as true although I haven't actually > > checked who posted how often. > > > > > which the Babel WG had already decided it will not= use. Despite the obvious fact, Juliusz kept bringing the matter up again a= nd again and again and again, most of the text in the proposed document has= been committed by him, and at IETF-102 he proposed to adopt this draft sho= rtly after it was first created. > > > > I don't think that the Babel WG has decided it will not use HMAC-based > > Babel security. It also seems reasonable that, considering how long > > previous documents have been available and how much discussion has > > been held on the topic, that a new HMAC-based Babel security document > > could be considered fairly quickly. > > > > > This way, the document looks mainly a product of very recent efforts= of Juliusz Chroboczek. Hence when Juliusz at IETF-102 in his HMAC slides s= tated "I am just the janitor here", that statement was false. > > > > I'm not sure what being "the janitor" means. Also, while there is some > > correlation, I don't think how much someone has contributed to a > > document can be determined by how often they posted to the mailing > > list or did commits. It seems reasonable that someone could produce > > major contributions to a document by reading previous documents and > > reading the comments on the mailing list. To the extent that "janitor" > > means someone who cleans things up, it seems reasonable that such > > contributions might go through someone who cleaned up some minor > > formatting or language issued before merging the contribution into a > > document -- but, of course, I don't actually know what the work flow > > was and I don't think you do either. So I just don't see any > > foundation for your claim that Juliusz's statement was false and I > > think that statement was inappropriate. > > I am sorry that you do not like the language I have to use, but I do not = currently see better means to get to the point: who is the actual author(s)= of draft-do-babel-hmac? > > This question is both appropriate and relevant. An author is the person r= esponsible for the technical contents of the document. Who exactly is respo= nsible for the technical contents of this routing protocol security mechani= sm proposed to be adopted for Standards Track work? Who exactly has the res= ponsibility to answer the question in point 2 of this objection? > > Are you saying it is Juliusz? I have already asked him and got no sound t= echnical answer. > > Are you saying it is Clara or Weronika? I am looking forward to study any= comments they make, if they do. > > I appreciate your willingness to discuss what other participants could me= an, but on this occasion I do not see other means to achieve clarity other = than the participants speaking for themselves, rather than someone making i= nterpretations on their behalf. Those listed on the title page are asserting that they are the authors. Juliusz in a separate answer has confirmed they are the authors. You have not, in my opinion, as I have previously stated, cited any good evidence that any of those listed on the title page are not authors. Yet you are attacking their integrity and honest. > > > Juliusz Chroboczek had previously commented that Clara Do and Weroni= ka Kolodziejak are his interns. I understand this as they are not independe= nt in their actions, so as a minimum it would be fair to let them speak fre= ely for themselves and to confirm the reasons for appearing on the list of = authors for a document that was written mostly by another person. > > > > If they want to post something to the mailing list, they are welcome > > to do so, but there is no requirement for them to. Until the draft is > > adopted by the WG, the WG has no authority over the author list shown > > on the title page. > > > > > It would also be very useful to hear about their experience in the a= reas of network protocols design, implementation and security, and how much= time they plan to spend on this project, as this is a Standards Track work= and it may be very demanding regardless of what other plans people have in= life. > > > > Well, I don't recall anyone else posting a resume to the list. I know = I haven't. > > > > > 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solved be= fore? > > > > > > The Babel WG has already had an opportunity to adopt a HMAC-based so= lution to fulfill the requirements of its charter, and the WG decided not t= o adopt. This decision was not rooted in the technical merits of the propos= ed solution. As far as the WG adoption call materials go, draft-ovsienko-ba= bel-rfc7298bis was good enough and had no unaddressed technical issues, I h= ad already clarified this before. > > > > Adoption of the draft was determined not to have consensus due to > > insufficient support and one objection. > > > > > I had asked, twice, Juliusz Chroboczek about the technical merits of= his new HMAC project, and, unfortunately, he had not provided an answer th= at would be sound and true. Given this input, I have to conclude this docum= ent does _not_ solve a problem that would not be solved already. > > > > The WG has the right to choose which draft will be the starting point > > for the WG draft efforts. > > > Thank you for providing the above comments, but they do not answer the qu= estion, so let me get back to the point again. > > Juliusz Chroboczek maintains that draft-do-babel-hmac addresses unresolve= d problems of my Babel security contributions. This statement is false by o= mission (Juliusz keeps comparing with RFC 7298, whereas he has seen that th= e input I had contributed during the adoption call of 7298bis I-D had addre= ssed all known issues). Hence the two requests below. See Juliusz response and the WG mailing list. There is clearly a difference of opinion here. You are entitled to your opinion that 7298bis addressed all known issues. Those who disagree with you are also entitled to their opinion. > * I take repeated false statements about the quality of my contributions = to the Babel WG as ongoing deliberate annoyance. I accept the chairs may be= unaware because of not following the WG mailing list, but I do not see it = as a valid reason for this annoyance to continue. Now I am asking the worki= ng group chairs to acknowledge this statement and to handle this annoyance = within the scope of their powers and duties in IETF. "Quality" is a subjective judgement about which people can reasonably differ. It has many dimensions. If you are going to complaint about "repeated false statements", you need to provide pointers to the specific statements. > * I am asking the person(s) responsible for the technical contents of dra= ft-do-babel-hmac to answer the same crucial question. Which specific techni= cal problems does this document solve that have not been solved before? See Juliusz response the WG mailing list. In any case, there was no consensus to adopt 7298bis but there is consensus to adopt do-babel-hmac. Donald =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com > -- > Denis Ovsienko From nobody Tue Aug 7 22:01:06 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30408130DE1; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:01:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fss-Y-_rj8_z; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22d.google.com (mail-it0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 048E4130DD9; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:01:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id d9-v6so1917561itf.2; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 22:01:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QPaFI4VvTRVnJzQFAY45zlFoFB0h873AGoWo03y2YjU=; b=tprVR34s/XpSvZkkjtz7QAq0LJiccboSm1CH2gDpLaqVhxLHWNCMAOqdr1qHKcK92X Q5kA3WOCQGgCb5pdZxtq/gZuKGf9c+akbESNCwute99VHAL81XKeOmQzw+HRgeV4w6SS gsYIT5QPPLU1StSYyrQvE15jeUXjJr3OV8V0cYFJOD1pUrjQ49zSgqeknvH/s8jNu4K7 dw+z2JRRRz7FtYGdM+/HvF5RLohsvnmZ2TFqJAIuc3984F7Q/nluW6x8kL+ua+gNuOMq FQNjNFVn/seYXPEPsiR/gP+UdhXztJff1F1neIjz/OI/UsZ5EerBPkyg6/ckWUzy18C4 PIKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QPaFI4VvTRVnJzQFAY45zlFoFB0h873AGoWo03y2YjU=; b=sq2W3PpGLo8spZj+asOYdKH0UYbnejFwe5wIf/yGkONEuY1GPnGRbDK/QxptAsqnm3 QmGt/j5qhooA+rCSYW9QZnmgZ8UCXeT9CFhy6Y7U/+5YfXJgz6ULtOTojqDFEWIT3dCH 0oxNZ247/SN0rGbwaBOdX5ywIMP1Q1jax27ncmxHrE/avcwYz13IAQI0rb5XQDmJVjh5 iqi5XXWVW3yBxspzNI8CyYe9QZL9BsusexYYdO+XikIcmDJQJppibq8+k3YRscqhCx1U wZkNnxguzGjMulY6xLjcJzQk85jDDJLfhq++R56CYfRWYk9RVx2WCI4rxd/+JFOVXRmb 02wg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHfShJ/JAxxAhXeqaQ27Wb868rrbs5M6/SiCeNo7D8eXpIk3BYC Qv7S+aptUcOR8gYH50mrF12Jw9+xamDszS74wpBxOw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPyPgtTL9//CXYTqh7MUPt8tmVVi0V7VAlvcO1pUvF8Fa1NC1fC7NKDFcgkW4d6I0CFvETDx/XsPrrDQ+u3GZhM= X-Received: by 2002:a24:7d0a:: with SMTP id b10-v6mr982825itc.105.1533704460991; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 22:01:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:00:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 01:00:45 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Adopted: WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2018 05:01:03 -0000 Based on the mailing list response, draft-do-babel-hmac-00 is adopted as a Babel WG draft. The authors should prepare and post a draft-ietf-babel-hman-00. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. > > Thanks, > Donald > =============================== > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Tue Aug 7 22:03:20 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 825BC130EF1; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:03:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y5tCY2Rv-o6q; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x232.google.com (mail-it0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A7A2130EF7; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x232.google.com with SMTP id h20-v6so1985628itf.2; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 22:03:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=akmhGqJY/8vLuEbYyMTddqjMwEk6FXHHUeRBFveVaAI=; b=fcfAdhyW3rYktZl0d3TQj1nUGJxLuPp686pmXY8sm7aN1j6MTgPOEn9DjY8QIyzOa5 MC+nvHvKKEgVppsjgUalWOHNXnQnjbI7w0/30zViuyRkHTNsawoMV4lWLWM1gZKIo7pQ rNL00W8mHgYbiPby8Dydd7P3DepMTSFTgG7e5D8kDDkVSQkFPnS3d007Gz7Y2VyUgXs3 iiUsYKPrpIqv56Rs7CnovmLc8u1NSMoQXnrVzLBLYzgi8gQV6aoQfSU5G5oxDoEm/vdR Oijpg/HMSLoMhRrFJsRI/bwBOLJKPGYay8XH7/auJv3SM6sOUvnZLBq5LUVl7HmL7pta 201Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=akmhGqJY/8vLuEbYyMTddqjMwEk6FXHHUeRBFveVaAI=; b=gFYj/+uTwUHn1SOf1Ih0jrljxFWFmronXXgmbky1ZGMXDB8oMBeAL9u7NRiKoBSe7g ZbXRhbWxvyiGV0AP+UarkdcoasOnQessV6BUHyV3hrHbnWWLcN3V8FAoV/WcvzKDzVks AEK6KB/X+EdbYE/S05MhR4XTfdNtyWckcgVvRPLK7fTz1ev1hci4CZLCLVDztcOAsiet yrNOvWNvZ8Mh9H1GBsOBJN6p52FRvWr4/L6YOI6V3oBrp3p7OqcZWfQsTsPavAKUJ6nW sUwwpBbZ1DZ9+VTrYgxroD9NbeuUOc1LcDJgTdD8hT6oEeUrC6Laj/3+GAdGVx8yWa7X AHcw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHU+uXkQ1p/TkeMKSwoaEwZ8uHXWjnmCvNmfZyrcBJpqxftFt3v L0xJ0Dgr09nOuZcUZToBOGa3mTh1KQxeA55T5znLRQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPzUDQTy+JfvDmdMyWHG5DY9MB7u9j58A8k9PVVWTIT7aavWXDyqhSijIwr0dG6goOuMXNPcRZpigdIjdiXW3pI= X-Received: by 2002:a24:4444:: with SMTP id o65-v6mr983247ita.94.1533704590177; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 22:03:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 22:02:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 01:02:54 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] IPR Call for draft-do/ietf-babel-hmac X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2018 05:03:18 -0000 Hi, This is a call for any IPR declaration for draft-do-babel-hmac-00. The authors must respond indicating whether they are personally aware of any IPR in this draft for which a declaration had not yet be filed with the IETF. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Thu Aug 9 03:48:15 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D8E130E06; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 03:48:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bQuEpfwF8UgU; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 03:48:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C48461286E3; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 03:48:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1533811686; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=12689; bh=89YxzSygcaZwr94zZUzwJ5ATSAlYfLzmZLG+6AI5MmI=; b=vkErgs0q2sMy/6uq28CppA8QwN0jq+jczia3OhotkSqijQQEJ3T+1HQ4TliIFidn EXRP+jFE1ugDHwhMK3qoOOozseL2zk4cPcGzRFHP4m20JyKi1WtllKDqDFv6KVBUCBD Z9LPoVehqOvN9Q1anyVnp8VU/5LwLneplFSwt0zg= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1533811685948703.1824195505956; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 03:48:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2018 11:48:05 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: , "Babel at IETF" Message-ID: <1651e4cfa39.f57f2903302423.8784413720731649807@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> <165140abe3b.cf1cc955191064.7082979724932704408@ovsienko.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2018 10:48:14 -0000 Hello Donald. Please find more comments below. I am sorry, but I am still unhappy about how my request to the WG chairs was handled. Having provided the information you asked for, I consider you in a position to review it again. ---- On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 05:58:15 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > Hi Denis, > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: > > Thank you for a detailed response Donald. > > > > I have commented on the points that look the most pressing to me. > > > > ---- On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 21:24:28 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > Thanks for responding to this WG draft adoption call. > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: > > > > ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:37 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > > > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > > > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > > > > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > > > > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > > > > > welcome. > > > > > > > > I object to the adoption of this document for the following reasons, which should be well-known to anybody who has been on the Babel WG mailing list, but if it takes to rub it in to action, I will rub it in. > > > > > > > > 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. > > > > > > > > The document lists Clara Do as its first author. Clara Do has never ever sent a single message, at all, however short or long, to the Babel WG mailing list. She has never presented anything at a Babel WG meeting, whether in person or remotely. In other words, this person has never participated in this working group. > > > > > > > > The document lists Weronika Kolodziejak as its second author. Weronika had sent 1 (one) message to the Babel WG mailing list, but made no other contributions (in the IETF sense of the term). > > > > > > A person who has produced text with the intent that it end up in a > > > Babel Internet Draft and that actually ends up in such an Internet > > > Draft, even if in an edited form, is a contributor to the WG and a > > > participant in the WG. > > > > > > > The document lists Juliusz Chroboczek as its third author. Juliusz in the past couple months had sent an incredible amount of messages to the Babel WG mailing list. Most of those were related to the HMAC-based method of Babel security, > > > > > > I'll take the above statements as true although I haven't actually > > > checked who posted how often. > > > > > > > which the Babel WG had already decided it will not use. Despite the obvious fact, Juliusz kept bringing the matter up again and again and again and again, most of the text in the proposed document has been committed by him, and at IETF-102 he proposed to adopt this draft shortly after it was first created. > > > > > > I don't think that the Babel WG has decided it will not use HMAC-based > > > Babel security. It also seems reasonable that, considering how long > > > previous documents have been available and how much discussion has > > > been held on the topic, that a new HMAC-based Babel security document > > > could be considered fairly quickly. > > > > > > > This way, the document looks mainly a product of very recent efforts of Juliusz Chroboczek. Hence when Juliusz at IETF-102 in his HMAC slides stated "I am just the janitor here", that statement was false. > > > > > > I'm not sure what being "the janitor" means. Also, while there is some > > > correlation, I don't think how much someone has contributed to a > > > document can be determined by how often they posted to the mailing > > > list or did commits. It seems reasonable that someone could produce > > > major contributions to a document by reading previous documents and > > > reading the comments on the mailing list. To the extent that "janitor" > > > means someone who cleans things up, it seems reasonable that such > > > contributions might go through someone who cleaned up some minor > > > formatting or language issued before merging the contribution into a > > > document -- but, of course, I don't actually know what the work flow > > > was and I don't think you do either. So I just don't see any > > > foundation for your claim that Juliusz's statement was false and I > > > think that statement was inappropriate. > > > > I am sorry that you do not like the language I have to use, but I do not currently see better means to get to the point: who is the actual author(s) of draft-do-babel-hmac? > > > > This question is both appropriate and relevant. An author is the person responsible for the technical contents of the document. Who exactly is responsible for the technical contents of this routing protocol security mechanism proposed to be adopted for Standards Track work? Who exactly has the responsibility to answer the question in point 2 of this objection? > > > > Are you saying it is Juliusz? I have already asked him and got no sound technical answer. > > > > Are you saying it is Clara or Weronika? I am looking forward to study any comments they make, if they do. > > > > I appreciate your willingness to discuss what other participants could mean, but on this occasion I do not see other means to achieve clarity other than the participants speaking for themselves, rather than someone making interpretations on their behalf. > > Those listed on the title page are asserting that they are the > authors. Juliusz in a separate answer has confirmed they are the > authors. You have not, in my opinion, as I have previously stated, > cited any good evidence that any of those listed on the title page are > not authors. Yet you are attacking their integrity and honest. Donald, when somebody else attacked my integrity and honesty on the list first, both you and Russ White were fine with that. Hence I am asking you not to discriminate. I raise the same questions about this document: 1. Who exactly is responsible for the technical contents of this routing protocol security mechanism proposed to be adopted for Standards Track work? 2. Which specific technical problems does this document solve that have not been solved before? If participants find those questions inconvenient and do not answer them clearly, this is not a problem of the messenger. > > > > Juliusz Chroboczek had previously commented that Clara Do and Weronika Kolodziejak are his interns. I understand this as they are not independent in their actions, so as a minimum it would be fair to let them speak freely for themselves and to confirm the reasons for appearing on the list of authors for a document that was written mostly by another person. > > > > > > If they want to post something to the mailing list, they are welcome > > > to do so, but there is no requirement for them to. Until the draft is > > > adopted by the WG, the WG has no authority over the author list shown > > > on the title page. > > > > > > > It would also be very useful to hear about their experience in the areas of network protocols design, implementation and security, and how much time they plan to spend on this project, as this is a Standards Track work and it may be very demanding regardless of what other plans people have in life. > > > > > > Well, I don't recall anyone else posting a resume to the list. I know I haven't. > > > > > > > 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solved before? > > > > > > > > The Babel WG has already had an opportunity to adopt a HMAC-based solution to fulfill the requirements of its charter, and the WG decided not to adopt. This decision was not rooted in the technical merits of the proposed solution. As far as the WG adoption call materials go, draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis was good enough and had no unaddressed technical issues, I had already clarified this before. > > > > > > Adoption of the draft was determined not to have consensus due to > > > insufficient support and one objection. > > > > > > > I had asked, twice, Juliusz Chroboczek about the technical merits of his new HMAC project, and, unfortunately, he had not provided an answer that would be sound and true. Given this input, I have to conclude this document does _not_ solve a problem that would not be solved already. > > > > > > The WG has the right to choose which draft will be the starting point > > > for the WG draft efforts. > > > > > > Thank you for providing the above comments, but they do not answer the question, so let me get back to the point again. > > > > Juliusz Chroboczek maintains that draft-do-babel-hmac addresses unresolved problems of my Babel security contributions. This statement is false by omission (Juliusz keeps comparing with RFC 7298, whereas he has seen that the input I had contributed during the adoption call of 7298bis I-D had addressed all known issues). Hence the two requests below. > > See Juliusz response and the WG mailing list. There is clearly a > difference of opinion here. You are entitled to your opinion that > 7298bis addressed all known issues. Those who disagree with you are > also entitled to their opinion. I have seen that response, and it repeats what Juliusz had stated before (on the mailing list and at IETF-102), and that is what I take as a deliberate personal insult. I am asking you to mind where you direct me. > > * I take repeated false statements about the quality of my contributions to the Babel WG as ongoing deliberate annoyance. I accept the chairs may be unaware because of not following the WG mailing list, but I do not see it as a valid reason for this annoyance to continue. Now I am asking the working group chairs to acknowledge this statement and to handle this annoyance within the scope of their powers and duties in IETF. > > "Quality" is a subjective judgement about which people can reasonably > differ. It has many dimensions. If you are going to complaint about > "repeated false statements", you need to provide pointers to the > specific statements. Fine, let me explain one more time and spell the details to make it portable for any required escalation. One of the contributions I have made to the Babel WG in 2018 started at IETF-101, where I proposed my I-D for the WG adoption. The contribution consisted of draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis-00 and related in-depth discussion on the mailing list during the I-D adoption call, which lasted for more than 2 months. Although the I-D was not adopted by the WG, to the best of my knowledge this contribution (the I-D and the mailing list discussion) had addressed all the questions and problems raised before and during the call. Juliusz Chroboczek, a participant to the Babel WG, about the time of the WG decision about my I-D started a very similar work, which ended up as draft-do-babel-hmac. Juliusz keeps claiming that his work solves design problems in my contribution, specifically, in RFC 7298 (published in 2014) or in 7298bis (-00 published on 5 March 2018) or the attack described in his message to the list dated 10 May 2018. I take that statement as false by deliberate omission. The discussion about the 7298bis adoption lasted up to 28 May 2018. Among other things, the problem stated by Juliusz on 10 May was discussed with him on the list on 11 May, 13 May, 15 May, and eventually I published the solution on 23 May. Juluisz had seen the message with the solution and replied to it, and referred to that solution later on the list. I have done a lot of work to deliver what I have delivered. I accept that other IETF participants may have no interest in my work. I do not accept another IETF participant again and again deliberately presenting my work as if it had a "fatal flaw" (sic) and using that as the only ground to endorse their own document. I take it as a deliberate personal insult, and I am asking you to stop this. > > * I am asking the person(s) responsible for the technical contents of draft-do-babel-hmac to answer the same crucial question. Which specific technical problems does this document solve that have not been solved before? > > See Juliusz response the WG mailing list. > > In any case, there was no consensus to adopt 7298bis but there is > consensus to adopt do-babel-hmac. I have seen the participants voting. -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Fri Aug 10 02:46:31 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCFC130EF1; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 02:46:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yS8ZwfT4R0by; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 02:46:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4E57130F2D; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 02:46:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1533894386; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=1737; bh=yg9MEsgMjEK44HqdU+Y05fvHtj/3yoO6GnTEIi82RS8=; b=Ngj/fZ7OeRte/KTKYk0KGEi2JYhXgOtYLBp0ibvd0OsIClsDvUBZTLUiCQVG4MFY TKAWn+mUhxXUdufnFjhWGj9mX9D/9Qzf+BhUAwfLDi2ajTfRLL4Ky8NojYQ3yTijkZf xp+c/bcDBRtmVT2rbtb5Q5NKIntutkz2dvIfZanA= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1533894384680140.06050975072287; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 02:46:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:46:24 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: "Babel at IETF" , "homenet" , "homenet-chairs@ietf.org" Message-ID: <165233adc27.ed43a049260204.815758962497666734@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE13054@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <1644a8a0be0.b4caee6f16267.1270300104515944073@ovsienko.info> <87tvpl9aww.wl-jch@irif.fr> <1644c60a033.c75360b277726.6584770912151361357@ovsienko.info> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE13054@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] [homenet] about Babel security (questions for Juliusz Chroboczek) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 09:46:30 -0000 ---- On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:46:35 +0100 STARK, BARBARA H wrote ---- > Hi Denis, > You appear to have perceived events and statements different from how others' have perceived these. > I don't find this thread accusing Juliusz of bad behavior to be an appropriate way of addressing your perceptions. > As chair of homenet (your email was sent to homenet and babel), I would appreciate an opportunity to talk to you directly (by phone / VoIP) to try to better address your perceptions. I find trying to do this by email very challenging. > If others share Denis' perceptions, please let the chairs know. > Thx, > Barbara It has been a month and a week since then and for clarity I find it necessary to follow up. Barbara, you had sent me an e-mail directly and thoroughly explained why in your opinion I was doing a wrong thing. I had studied that with attention. I had answered your message, at length, directly on 2 July and explained, as clearly as I could, which meaningful details you did not take into account from my point of view. Also I had asked my own questions, including if you still find my posts to the list(s) inappropriate given that input. I expected a reply, but it never came. I accept people have their own plans for their own time. However, in order to avoid further misunderstanding in the working group(s), please mind that from now on I am unlikely to engage in off-list discussions about this matter. I have already explained the problem on the list, several times over, and I have raised exactly the points I was going to raise. If Barbara or anybody else has anything to add, please do it on the list under your name, like I do. Thank you. -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Fri Aug 10 04:15:23 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5A0130DCA for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 04:15:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BzIgiIlr-Sbt for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 04:15:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85D5A126DBF for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 04:15:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1533899719; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=938; bh=Eynu9uKzVfPMmxjux0z9WviuH8IShCnZ22FlxDgobao=; b=cJnDYk61TFgrqzYD36++1XhEps+acRHXDGqi2XmC/PKwLI1ZBjig2IEv9E9IAoGN xuVm68eF2NHe5S4WLuNTd8sFuB5bo2n1kCSlcDR49UUKbY9NVUSyIbyPoy49/HmQ2vB 7CXWigadRAIHWdffdH4zBFQ4+jFsXEhnACVjaLGQ= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1533899719008166.465511389114; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 04:15:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 12:15:19 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: "Babel at IETF" Message-ID: <165238c415e.b41546af271485.8879213192113269656@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: <87in5bcwgh.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <8736wg38tr.wl-jch@irif.fr> <164b1be34c9.1162aef0a154544.1181395100483129401@ovsienko.info> <87in5bcwgh.wl-jch@irif.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Use of packet trailer -- please protest now or never X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:15:22 -0000 ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:10:38 +0100 Juliusz Chroboczek w= rote ----=20 > Private mail.=20 > =20 > > It is understandable you do not want to wait any longer because=20 > > draft-do-babel-hmac, despite its document name, was mostly written by= =20 > > you, rather than Clara or Weronika.=20 > =20 > The technical work was mostly Ovsienko, D=C3=B4 and Ko=C5=82odziejak. I= t is true=20 > that I wrote most of the text.=20 > =20 > I initially considered adding a fourth author -- Ovsienko. But after yo= ur=20 > mail of 28 June I changed my mind.=20 Hello Juliusz. Currently it is difficult for me to handle such an attitude on my own, so I= will keep seeking help, or at least publicity to hold it back -- please mi= nd that this response is to the Babel WG list. Please do not contact me off= -list. I sincerely hope you will have better ideas in future. --=20 Denis Ovsienko From nobody Fri Aug 10 07:13:49 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37DBC129C6A; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:13:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wLpam83Eeu-Q; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:13:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 972B8130E4C; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 07:13:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049297.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w7AE6g3c034275; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:13:34 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2ksamttgnj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:13:34 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w7AEDWkA007969; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:13:32 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [135.47.91.189]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w7AEDToW007903; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:13:29 -0400 Received: from zlp30483.vci.att.com (zlp30483.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 031934014668; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:13:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.154]) by zlp30483.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id E24224014665; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:13:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.5]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAE.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.154]) with mapi id 14.03.0408.000; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:13:28 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Denis Ovsienko'" , Babel at IETF , homenet Thread-Topic: [babel] [homenet] about Babel security (questions for Juliusz Chroboczek) Thread-Index: AQHUMI8LOMAFDjjHXUCJjgs+0LXfp6S49rNw Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:13:27 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE69F50@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <1644a8a0be0.b4caee6f16267.1270300104515944073@ovsienko.info> <87tvpl9aww.wl-jch@irif.fr> <1644c60a033.c75360b277726.6584770912151361357@ovsienko.info> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE13054@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <165233adc27.ed43a049260204.815758962497666734@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: <165233adc27.ed43a049260204.815758962497666734@ovsienko.info> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.242.173] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-08-10_08:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1808100154 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] [homenet] about Babel security (questions for Juliusz Chroboczek) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:13:40 -0000 > ---- On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:46:35 +0100 STARK, BARBARA H > wrote ---- > Hi Denis, > You appear to have perceived > events and statements different from how others' have perceived these. > > I don't find this thread accusing Juliusz of bad behavior to be an > appropriate way of addressing your perceptions. > > As chair of homenet (your email was sent to homenet and babel), I woul= d > appreciate an opportunity to talk to you directly (by phone / VoIP) to tr= y to > better address your perceptions. I find trying to do this by email very > challenging. > > If others share Denis' perceptions, please let the chairs know. > > Thx, > > Barbara >=20 > It has been a month and a week since then and for clarity I find it neces= sary > to follow up. >=20 > Barbara, you had sent me an e-mail directly and thoroughly explained why = in > your opinion I was doing a wrong thing. I had studied that with attention= . >=20 > I had answered your message, at length, directly on 2 July and explained,= as > clearly as I could, which meaningful details you did not take into accoun= t from > my point of view. Also I had asked my own questions, including if you sti= ll find > my posts to the list(s) inappropriate given that input. I expected a repl= y, but > it never came. Hi Denis, I apologize for not replying to you earlier. I will respect your wish and r= eply to you on list, rather than unicast. I would much prefer to unicast yo= u with what I have to say. The chief reason I did not reply before was I felt I needed advice on handl= ing this situation. I consider Juliusz to be a friend and needed to make su= re I wasn't allowing friendship to get in the way of impartial chairing. At= IETF in Montreal, I asked several people who are long-time, respected IETF= leaders (with no homenet or babel affiliation, and who do not know you or = Juliusz) to look at your postings, provide me with their opinions, and reco= mmend a course of action.=20 The reaction to your postings was universally negative. All who saw them co= nsidered them inappropriate and abusive. The recommendation was universally= to remove you from WG email lists, if such postings did not stop. I apologize again for not replying to you earlier, but this is a very diffi= cult email for me to write. It is clear to me that you are a highly intelli= gent person who has considerable technical expertise and knowledge. I also = believe that you are a good person with honest motivations. But you don't s= eem to interpret things the same as other people do. Your personal attacks against Juliusz need to stop. What you are accusing h= im of is not a violation of IETF or WG procedures or policies. Therefore th= e accusations are not relevant. Furthermore, they appear to me to make base= less claims. If the personal attacks do not stop on the homenet list, Stephen and I will= be forced to take the recommended action and remove you from the list. As Stephen is truly impartial here, I will ask him to make any final decisi= ons on this matter. I recognize that I'm not the right person to try to help you better underst= and how people are reacting to your emails. If you are willing, however, I = would be happy to find someone who would volunteer to mentor you. I think y= ou are a valuable human being with deep technical knowledge and expertise w= ho has the potential to make a great contribution to IETF. Barbara > I accept people have their own plans for their own time. However, in orde= r > to avoid further misunderstanding in the working group(s), please mind th= at > from now on I am unlikely to engage in off-list discussions about this ma= tter. I > have already explained the problem on the list, several times over, and I > have raised exactly the points I was going to raise. If Barbara or anybod= y else > has anything to add, please do it on the list under your name, like I do. >=20 > Thank you. >=20 > -- > Denis Ovsienko >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps- > 3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_babel&d=3DDwICAg&c=3DLFYZ- > o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=3DLoGzhC-8sc8SY8Tq4vrfog&m=3DrEUH5kHzbYNXLwd- > cyPRyKR6UyRf8P7NpzoHgfucn48&s=3DAjodDmUXAB1a7IecLNpGVaxx5QElrd_S > NPNF8MvrhUY&e=3D From nobody Fri Aug 10 13:16:03 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 710DC130E2F; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:16:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ob2fHjD4IQA3; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:16:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x229.google.com (mail-io0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A1E1130FC4; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:16:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x229.google.com with SMTP id z19-v6so8728491ioh.4; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:16:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8Hh+UVeeRey/0z5Iw/4Wcn2QBuMIYWNldNdDU2m2VLo=; b=iiyI4h8KUGRl50rf7dIjTLip++mb18Y29ZkgCoce3QOMZMI9UHMH3l8ymbbm9XCumS dgfpiNfcFsi35VTewX9ihrqLZU5z4oFD1ayIPDKynNG1NnRRvccsspDcu+OuzPeCPu8n d2Gwtb+ZAimaQ/rf5n6DQlM8A07X+NMZRiSCiTH9M1Our6WmOwLiS5qbomDo+uCGSkr3 s+5+Ly1aHNR//w8ei9dLC9W7tJ9iSD+cDUx0y/mRh4nGisrgMhaPZzXl294rQK6vW4qW wuvUAQaR7CKwDZBaryZfagxf58pSkMgGb80ZfDuwYtaCdldgfDzMviYbwcK9DrD1Qn4u zyqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8Hh+UVeeRey/0z5Iw/4Wcn2QBuMIYWNldNdDU2m2VLo=; b=K4aHE5d39FPOJejuQvWJ1Zk25N+IPypTKsK+PmKhytyO9DHp8nGZ25T6NDONQSJhmq xlLROIkA7WgHOPiDAWbZVfYHhDq5ZMV8Z0jTKiY9hWp4DaBbSlkO2YeHEfQsdDho5IqG lBlam+Q3apHKoN2Ry2X4JIdTK+zabJyj5yrXrB6859w+76ypdayKI79Uh03FTKOtaDNu Zp7T8xxXCO0EcuHyd8GwECR3WCoe+VZ2R9rZGA7ps0nx0YxEQMzHL6FL444L1xF+J+4k jxUDhQy+S+26vU58/+QXXtL0pb5BtShtrhp4Qt4eK2OOo5qJJG8GBW9rO6pHEUmUDENo Z0qg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHP40taK6usYfFIvZy1dIujw8MRe+N+Geg1j9IVUkUF0d5ApL/Q 1dd8bS9ZbOAHaABVseael9TsqxAOMaOgA19wA0XH0WZP X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPwTpRc/Xw+6sBXU7Pri1BJGn+9g8KfFFJdLnIyPvkpXmvDi1FAZvuxTlTxyNb7O9MtHNVQL7p9hHZE3oRFqj54= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:ac45:: with SMTP id v66-v6mr2463855ioe.66.1533932159310; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:15:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 13:15:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1651e4cfa39.f57f2903302423.8784413720731649807@ovsienko.info> References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> <165140abe3b.cf1cc955191064.7082979724932704408@ovsienko.info> <1651e4cfa39.f57f2903302423.8784413720731649807@ovsienko.info> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 16:15:43 -0400 Message-ID: To: Denis Ovsienko Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 20:16:02 -0000 Denis, On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:48 AM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: > > Hello Donald. > > Please find more comments below. I am sorry, but I am still unhappy about= how my request to the WG chairs was handled. Having provided the informati= on you asked for, I consider you in a position to review it again. I would be interested in exactly what your "request" is. You post a lot of questions, many of which seem to be of relatively little relevance to the BABEL WG meeting its Charter goals, which is the purpose of the WG. Is your request that all of your questions be answered to your satisfaction? If so, that seems like an inherently open ended and unreasonable request. > ---- On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 05:58:15 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > Hi Denis, > > > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Denis Ovsienko w= rote: > > > Thank you for a detailed response Donald. > > > > > > I have commented on the points that look the most pressing to me. > > > > > > ---- On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 21:24:28 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > > > Thanks for responding to this WG draft adoption call. > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Denis Ovsienko wrote: > > > > > ---- On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:37 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > > > > > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hm= ac. > > > > > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for = a bit > > > > > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate wheth= er you > > > > > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft al= so > > > > > > welcome. > > > > > > > > > > I object to the adoption of this document for the following rea= sons, which should be well-known to anybody who has been on the Babel WG ma= iling list, but if it takes to rub it in to action, I will rub it in. > > > > > > > > > > 1. Questionable attribution of authorship. > > > > > > > > > > The document lists Clara Do as its first author. Clara Do has n= ever ever sent a single message, at all, however short or long, to the Babe= l WG mailing list. She has never presented anything at a Babel WG meeting, = whether in person or remotely. In other words, this person has never partic= ipated in this working group. > > > > > > > > > > The document lists Weronika Kolodziejak as its second author. W= eronika had sent 1 (one) message to the Babel WG mailing list, but made no = other contributions (in the IETF sense of the term). > > > > > > > > A person who has produced text with the intent that it end up in = a > > > > Babel Internet Draft and that actually ends up in such an Interne= t > > > > Draft, even if in an edited form, is a contributor to the WG and = a > > > > participant in the WG. > > > > > > > > > The document lists Juliusz Chroboczek as its third author. Juli= usz in the past couple months had sent an incredible amount of messages to = the Babel WG mailing list. Most of those were related to the HMAC-based met= hod of Babel security, > > > > > > > > I'll take the above statements as true although I haven't actuall= y > > > > checked who posted how often. > > > > > > > > > which the Babel WG had already decided it wil= l not use. Despite the obvious fact, Juliusz kept bringing the matter up ag= ain and again and again and again, most of the text in the proposed documen= t has been committed by him, and at IETF-102 he proposed to adopt this draf= t shortly after it was first created. > > > > > > > > I don't think that the Babel WG has decided it will not use HMAC-= based > > > > Babel security. It also seems reasonable that, considering how lo= ng > > > > previous documents have been available and how much discussion ha= s > > > > been held on the topic, that a new HMAC-based Babel security docu= ment > > > > could be considered fairly quickly. > > > > > > > > > This way, the document looks mainly a product of very recent ef= forts of Juliusz Chroboczek. Hence when Juliusz at IETF-102 in his HMAC sli= des stated "I am just the janitor here", that statement was false. > > > > > > > > I'm not sure what being "the janitor" means. Also, while there is= some > > > > correlation, I don't think how much someone has contributed to a > > > > document can be determined by how often they posted to the mailin= g > > > > list or did commits. It seems reasonable that someone could produ= ce > > > > major contributions to a document by reading previous documents a= nd > > > > reading the comments on the mailing list. To the extent that "jan= itor" > > > > means someone who cleans things up, it seems reasonable that such > > > > contributions might go through someone who cleaned up some minor > > > > formatting or language issued before merging the contribution int= o a > > > > document -- but, of course, I don't actually know what the work f= low > > > > was and I don't think you do either. So I just don't see any > > > > foundation for your claim that Juliusz's statement was false and = I > > > > think that statement was inappropriate. > > > > > > I am sorry that you do not like the language I have to use, but I do= not currently see better means to get to the point: who is the actual auth= or(s) of draft-do-babel-hmac? > > > > > > This question is both appropriate and relevant. An author is the per= son responsible for the technical contents of the document. Who exactly is = responsible for the technical contents of this routing protocol security me= chanism proposed to be adopted for Standards Track work? Who exactly has th= e responsibility to answer the question in point 2 of this objection? > > > > > > Are you saying it is Juliusz? I have already asked him and got no so= und technical answer. > > > > > > Are you saying it is Clara or Weronika? I am looking forward to stud= y any comments they make, if they do. > > > > > > I appreciate your willingness to discuss what other participants cou= ld mean, but on this occasion I do not see other means to achieve clarity o= ther than the participants speaking for themselves, rather than someone mak= ing interpretations on their behalf. > > > > Those listed on the title page are asserting that they are the > > authors. Juliusz in a separate answer has confirmed they are the > > authors. You have not, in my opinion, as I have previously stated, > > cited any good evidence that any of those listed on the title page are > > not authors. Yet you are attacking their integrity and honest. > > > Donald, when somebody else attacked my integrity and honesty on the list = first, both you and Russ White were fine with that. Hence I am asking you n= ot to discriminate. If you are going to complain your integrity and honesty were attacked on the list, provide the URL to the message(s) you are referencing. WG mail archives are available in a couple places including here https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/babel/current/maillist.html > I raise the same questions about this document: > > 1. Who exactly is responsible for the technical contents of this routing = protocol security mechanism proposed to be adopted for Standards Track work= ? This has been clarified by the message here https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/babel/current/msg01470.html > 2. Which specific technical problems does this document solve that have n= ot been solved before? Why do you believe the answer to the above question is important? Why is it worth the time of the WG at this point to discuss this question? Since draft-do-babel-hmac-00.txt has been adopted, wouldn't examining it for technical flaws be a lot more important? > If participants find those questions inconvenient and do not answer them = clearly, this is not a problem of the messenger. I do not agree that you are entitled to have your questions answered to your satisfaction. To the extent that (1) you find the answers to one of your questions unclear and (2) getting agreement on the answer to that problem is not necessary for the BABEL WG to advance, then I think that, to a significant extent, the unclarity that you see is your problem. > > > > > Juliusz Chroboczek had previously commented that Clara Do and W= eronika Kolodziejak are his interns. I understand this as they are not inde= pendent in their actions, so as a minimum it would be fair to let them spea= k freely for themselves and to confirm the reasons for appearing on the lis= t of authors for a document that was written mostly by another person. > > > > > > > > If they want to post something to the mailing list, they are welc= ome > > > > to do so, but there is no requirement for them to. Until the draf= t is > > > > adopted by the WG, the WG has no authority over the author list s= hown > > > > on the title page. > > > > > > > > > It would also be very useful to hear about their experience in = the areas of network protocols design, implementation and security, and how= much time they plan to spend on this project, as this is a Standards Track= work and it may be very demanding regardless of what other plans people ha= ve in life. > > > > > > > > Well, I don't recall anyone else posting a resume to the list. I = know I haven't. > > > > > > > > > 2. What problem does this document solve that has not been solv= ed before? > > > > > > > > > > The Babel WG has already had an opportunity to adopt a HMAC-bas= ed solution to fulfill the requirements of its charter, and the WG decided = not to adopt. This decision was not rooted in the technical merits of the p= roposed solution. As far as the WG adoption call materials go, draft-ovsien= ko-babel-rfc7298bis was good enough and had no unaddressed technical issues= , I had already clarified this before. > > > > > > > > Adoption of the draft was determined not to have consensus due to > > > > insufficient support and one objection. > > > > > > > > > I had asked, twice, Juliusz Chroboczek about the technical meri= ts of his new HMAC project, and, unfortunately, he had not provided an answ= er that would be sound and true. Given this input, I have to conclude this = document does _not_ solve a problem that would not be solved already. > > > > > > > > The WG has the right to choose which draft will be the starting p= oint > > > > for the WG draft efforts. > > > > > > > > > Thank you for providing the above comments, but they do not answer t= he question, so let me get back to the point again. > > > > > > Juliusz Chroboczek maintains that draft-do-babel-hmac addresses unre= solved problems of my Babel security contributions. This statement is false= by omission (Juliusz keeps comparing with RFC 7298, whereas he has seen th= at the input I had contributed during the adoption call of 7298bis I-D had = addressed all known issues). Hence the two requests below. > > > > See Juliusz response and the WG mailing list. There is clearly a > > difference of opinion here. You are entitled to your opinion that > > 7298bis addressed all known issues. Those who disagree with you are > > also entitled to their opinion. > > I have seen that response, and it repeats what Juliusz had stated before = (on the mailing list and at IETF-102), and that is what I take as a deliber= ate personal insult. I am asking you to mind where you direct me. I think a statement by someone that they see a technical flaw in a draft is generally not a personal insult. > > > * I take repeated false statements about the quality of my contribut= ions to the Babel WG as ongoing deliberate annoyance. I accept the chairs m= ay be unaware because of not following the WG mailing list, but I do not se= e it as a valid reason for this annoyance to continue. Now I am asking the = working group chairs to acknowledge this statement and to handle this annoy= ance within the scope of their powers and duties in IETF. > > > > "Quality" is a subjective judgement about which people can reasonably > > differ. It has many dimensions. If you are going to complaint about > > "repeated false statements", you need to provide pointers to the > > specific statements. > > Fine, let me explain one more time and spell the details to make it porta= ble for any required escalation. > > One of the contributions I have made to the Babel WG in 2018 started at I= ETF-101, where I proposed my I-D for the WG adoption. The contribution cons= isted of draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis-00 and related in-depth discussion= on the mailing list during the I-D adoption call, which lasted for more th= an 2 months. Although the I-D was not adopted by the WG, to the best of my = knowledge this contribution (the I-D and the mailing list discussion) had a= ddressed all the questions and problems raised before and during the call. > > Juliusz Chroboczek, a participant to the Babel WG, about the time of the = WG decision about my I-D started a very similar work, which ended up as dra= ft-do-babel-hmac. Juliusz keeps claiming that his work solves design proble= ms in my contribution, specifically, in RFC 7298 (published in 2014) or in = 7298bis (-00 published on 5 March 2018) or the attack described in his mess= age to the list dated 10 May 2018. I've just read over a lot of the mailing list discussion. Juliusz did discuss your proposed changes to protect against the attacks he described. I do not agree with your characterization of what Juliusz has written. > I take that statement as false by deliberate omission. The discussion abo= ut the 7298bis adoption lasted up to 28 May 2018. Among other things, the p= roblem stated by Juliusz on 10 May was discussed with him on the list on 11= May, 13 May, 15 May, and eventually I published the solution on 23 May. Ju= luisz had seen the message with the solution and replied to it, and referre= d to that solution later on the list. Right. So Juliusz pointed out a problem and you posted a proposed solution. Presumably you wouldn't have posted a solution if you didn't agree there was a problem. People can differ about how good your solution is. In any case, there wasn't a WG consensus to adopt your draft. You could have modified your draft based on the comments about it that you had accepted and/or your solution and ask for another adoption call, but you did not. So how was the WG, which did have a lot of interest in an HMAC-based scheme, supposed to progress after the adoption failure for your draft? > I have done a lot of work to deliver what I have delivered. I agree with that. > I accept that other IETF participants may have no interest in my work. I do not agree that other IETF participants have no interest in your work. > I do not accept another IETF participant again and again deliberately pre= senting my work as if it had a "fatal flaw" (sic) and using that as the onl= y ground to endorse their own document. I take it as a deliberate personal = insult, and I am asking you to stop this. I do not see URLs to messages you are complaining about. I'm not going to do your research for you. I don't understand why you think there would be any further comments on your 7298bis draft, positive or negative, (that is, I don't see why you think there would be anything to stop) if you didn't keep bringing it up. Thanks, Donald =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com > > > * I am asking the person(s) responsible for the technical contents o= f draft-do-babel-hmac to answer the same crucial question. Which specific t= echnical problems does this document solve that have not been solved before= ? > > > > See Juliusz response the WG mailing list. > > > > In any case, there was no consensus to adopt 7298bis but there is > > consensus to adopt do-babel-hmac. > > I have seen the participants voting. > > -- > Denis Ovsienko From nobody Sat Aug 11 05:29:32 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3B78130DEB; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:29:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QHY8LpL969yX; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:29:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 920E812F18C; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:29:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w7BCSX5O012196 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:28:33 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w7BCSnUr018867; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:28:49 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80E95EB200; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id JgJPT6c8qrn9; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (public-gprs414415.centertel.pl [37.47.250.16]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7F65AEB22E; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:19 +0200 Message-ID: <87600ht7c0.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:28:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:28:50 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B6ED671.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B6ED681.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B6ED671.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B6ED681.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B6ED671.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B6ED681.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-do/ietf-babel-hmac X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 12:29:31 -0000 I do not hold any IPR related to draft-do-babel-hmac-00. From nobody Sat Aug 11 05:29:46 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3715130DEB; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:29:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SFbzr2qv75cj; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98FF412F18C; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:29:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w7BCSokb012225 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:28:50 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w7BCT6ah018889; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:06 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94610EB22E; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:41 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id om8Cgalm0-Kz; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (public-gprs414415.centertel.pl [37.47.250.16]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 584F1EB22D; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:40 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:39 +0200 Message-ID: <874lg1t7bg.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:28:50 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:29:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B6ED682.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B6ED692.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B6ED682.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B6ED692.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B6ED682.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B6ED692.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-decimo/ietf-babel-dtls X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 12:29:45 -0000 I do not hold any IPR related to draft-decimo-ietf-bael-dtls. From nobody Sat Aug 11 05:33:05 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1F4130DE8; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:33:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HaUGqvS3B7FK; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x231.google.com (mail-io0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 109A612F18C; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x231.google.com with SMTP id i18-v6so10042908ioj.13; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:33:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Cxi146Q6tHnmh/fzf/9lSs6TDivuFvUrOCxz9LQ7bGU=; b=VRaQf8+jJX0ZI6qy/kLdgR3BGSP5wiKrSn/g7yV2ASoXq5LrIkk53EXoSayFkboEQQ s3esO4Avk6N11wknAI6Ir6hv3yGGTnVRojdfs1fl+faY4+pMoqT2fbcQahwjWgCch1BA 8pRYfQvoG4EUEzR3NrdhmHZyrdq5Jlt87UX+R4HNIYEj+pWgYICCxn6jK0AJm6dZ7FgN Ikmcp6Nzbrhzw9FEtYShlULBtn9JHglbxMGgsqsgea4CnBTbwo9U/5gcSOCctWxkmSJv i2XUDRYvYwfoJO1SB3obciRTyQnqOX7+4EJ4z/u339xeAc9E9cMnS6YuyYJ2UNORW4mH FA6Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Cxi146Q6tHnmh/fzf/9lSs6TDivuFvUrOCxz9LQ7bGU=; b=VdHpB9FZyGkuVZnBPtFAfZFHLMKJKV+4ePGKaAdYA/XHbaNcShjaS1SOBF9xK9c2Z8 y6NPHCygICLtc4w7/qC8Tu9Un8aYR2MxRK4QazKWj8p/5b0KfiK/hz+uxQpPXjWESoif iYU1IknqHjxYHuADbN+T8Ucm5GF3S9jO7wkfi4kKxEQQXetamWAtf/XfDOzEa7LxDsQK J7XumH7IE1NIV5ULaa9JfUzKq7Makgn+QMEMQtHFR4xQ9mtQTRWbOLg2YJH1Nx1hX27E +45kuXWMherKGulQBVLFi+nIicZ7C1Qfl+Fh0ec568r+fgfo5V608ShNPAkJWKUgDRCX 78GA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHEQw8N8ycAYF9+yRNRH2uY7Jd2rY4NP5AME8OJK2LL9lDsJ1pq mxH/zpn9h0GLZ2opxWI0vtgUjSLy9jEWBhj0hxU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPxVjvDYB5mDzYo/LVejnq24NRPXXNi/4x2l9mCdUhQ6ASLRruC21pK1Y1W4LgvocTWOz05vLI2udNlmPiHksz0= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:b955:: with SMTP id j82-v6mr8527016iof.158.1533990781334; Sat, 11 Aug 2018 05:33:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Antonin_D=C3=A9cimo?= Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 14:32:48 +0200 Message-ID: To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009c3ccc0573280f37" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-decimo/ietf-babel-dtls X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 12:33:04 -0000 --0000000000009c3ccc0573280f37 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Donald, I do not hold any IPR related to this draft. Antonin D=C3=A9cimo --0000000000009c3ccc0573280f37 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Donald,

I do not hold any IPR related to this draft.=C2=A0

Antonin D=C3=A9cimo
--0000000000009c3ccc0573280f37-- From nobody Mon Aug 13 14:14:39 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27F3C1310CA; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:14:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pxhxTz3EZ3i5; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A87B1310C4; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:14:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1534194874; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=1781; bh=dThrsdCDMzXjTRZfV/InVAdXrzOzSFsHAJaKpedPwYI=; b=oDUVh9OsWVhGdUTs1nWoZc8LjH08c3KS2TGBKh5R1+5c9ZUUhyqSIGyyQQ8eVTxO C3Gp0wYNf/GTAUQv7eIYw0yGZ30ZXJnAqaJm6hSKAWIMhQFScv1ldjCc4UWBfL4Olbf frcek2Dr9bUxv7uF8eJsQTe/pEN8m0eGbQCmVuFs= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1534194874100330.3664352941588; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:14:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 22:14:34 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: "Babel at IETF" , Message-ID: <1653523f6f3.dc6c8cbd134776.6724300608835131262@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: References: <1650c1a8ddf.dcee3d8c318053.6862501659664757597@ovsienko.info> <165140abe3b.cf1cc955191064.7082979724932704408@ovsienko.info> <1651e4cfa39.f57f2903302423.8784413720731649807@ovsienko.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 21:14:38 -0000 ---- On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 21:15:43 +0100 Donald Eastlake wrote ---- > Denis, [...] > > > Those listed on the title page are asserting that they are the > > > authors. Juliusz in a separate answer has confirmed they are the > > > authors. You have not, in my opinion, as I have previously stated, > > > cited any good evidence that any of those listed on the title page are > > > not authors. Yet you are attacking their integrity and honest. > > > > > > Donald, when somebody else attacked my integrity and honesty on the list first, both you and Russ White were fine with that. Hence I am asking you not to discriminate. > > If you are going to complain your integrity and honesty were attacked > on the list, provide the URL to the message(s) you are referencing. WG > mail archives are available in a couple places including here > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/babel/current/maillist.html Donald, I am not going to complain about this specific point, but this is what I mean: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/babel/current/msg01179.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- already in 6126bis. This is bad for a security document, and is especially worrying since the author has a poor track record of listening to stylistic (as opposed to technical) criticisms. Should the stylistic issues with the document be fixed, and should my ideas for fixing the vulnerability work out, I'd support adoption with no hesitation. As it currently stands, and since I do not trust the author to fix the editorial issues once the document is adopted, I'm not sure. ----------------------------------------------------------------- So do not discriminate. -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Wed Aug 15 15:01:44 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732D9130E98; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:01:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.83.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: babel@ietf.org Message-ID: <153437050242.3061.747757307560076675@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:01:42 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] I-D Action: draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 22:01:43 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Babel routing protocol WG of the IETF. Title : Babel Routing Protocol over Datagram Transport Layer Security Authors : Antonin Decimo David Schinazi Juliusz Chroboczek Filename : draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2018-08-15 Abstract: This documents describes how to use Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) to secure the Babel Routing Protocol. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-dtls/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Wed Aug 15 15:07:25 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F162124BE5; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:07:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.009 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kxSdYYnB-7IE; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com [17.171.2.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A58FD1286E3; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com [127.0.0.1]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w7FM6v9n016560; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:07:17 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apple.com; h=sender : from : message-id : content-type : mime-version : subject : date : in-reply-to : cc : to : references; s=20180706; bh=MSjeohumlPjZzkWuhMGQZ0JV7O59Ng0cY/EA1oszq2g=; b=Yk3k63ZNX/yXGNqWht2DggTf5fYc2dRj3V75Lnx7Ab6oWz742Td5QrVfMcsUPV31Sd9p 8MOtD1iSsEou5cKJ0XFsCrYpGT9xF1W/EGhOK4ny7ou3gItjmJi37qHL6o2KXr9qgKjm MNSKYVQT4wNQ2pONAcKp8DHdIuacHFIs0UY1iGKziYAo0tj2SjEWZy/I6DahXt0lXnhT HTJ5Z/PcpzTRPdnnRLrPD/r0DU54ulBdtN8ot4PjFt9AdLpBhNMmULjNHHGiRIih2TTC VIiAcDtNNXgfFbADNZuB7pqPIiQtd/2OyosoNDbonETCH0t2bM54iqbTImG/deAzfXJE Ug== Received: from relay1.asia.apple.com (relay1.asia.apple.com [17.82.200.18]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com with ESMTP id 2ksxsy71ms-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:07:17 -0700 X-AuditID: 1152c812-dbfff70000001f00-93-5b74a4100ffc Received: from sg3-mmpp-sz01.asia.apple.com ( [17.84.80.93]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay1.asia.apple.com (Apple Singapore relay) with SMTP id 36.78.07936.014A47B5; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:07:12 +0800 (MYT) Received: from [17.192.155.180] by sg3-mmpp-sz01.asia.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PDI003FUW3W1910@sg3-mmpp-sz01.asia.apple.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:07:12 +0800 (+08) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi Message-id: Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6E44BA56-06CA-4BC0-93AE-4E97FFB82270" MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:07:07 -0700 In-reply-to: Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org, draft-decimo-babel-dtls@ietf.org To: Donald Eastlake References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrELMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiGBIQqyuwpCTaoPMNn8Xp3lssFlsWdbNY HNyuaXG5v4PFgcVj56y77B5LlvxkCmCK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4Mp49LGRuWC9U8WUuxsZGxj7 rbsYOTgkBEwkPh8o72Lk4hASWMYk8XbVemYIp4FJ4mP3CcYuRk4OYQFpia4Ld1lBGtgEtCQO rDECCfMK2EjsWTmVDcRmFkiSmHzgLDNE3Fhi/eaFrBCtkRKbXy4CG8MioCpxsuUcC4jNKRAs 8XzHUxaI3liJthkrwGpEBNQkXi9fwAKySkggQGL9/xSQsISAokT/mkNsExj5ZyHZNgvJNoi4 tsSyha+B4hxAto7E5IWMqMIQ9sfzR5gWMLKtYhQtSs1JrDTUSyzOTNRLLCjISdVLzs/dxAgK 6aATQjsYP+43OMQowMGoxMN7ZlJJtBBrYllxZe4hRgkOZiURXjU+oBBvSmJlVWpRfnxRaU5q 8SFGaQ4WJXFei6zaKCGB9MSS1OzU1ILUIpgsEwenVAMj/8kJxdc3hOx+9lRwj8uenRqvTY+W uBvmXPk7WeJtm476m7sLOPYtjPf0bfeTEJDZfvVQ55NjR0yec2zMXbd9Gs+s1eeevarj0wh2 KYz9O0mLrflZhsJGJf6S396XRdt/f3Jftm3u7Jr6DF6pnD7B1sOa0+pWx0y88+iLKEtC55z1 vy7fnCfOpMRSnJFoqMVcVJwIAEHW96NlAgAA X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-08-15_08:, , signatures=0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Adopted: WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 22:07:24 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_6E44BA56-06CA-4BC0-93AE-4E97FFB82270 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thank you Donald. I've submitted draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00 with the same text as = draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01. > Name: draft-ietf-babel-dtls > Revision: 00 > Title: Babel Routing Protocol over Datagram Transport = Layer Security > Document date: 2018-08-15 > Group: babel > Pages: 8 > URL: = https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00.txt = Status:= https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-dtls/ = Htmlized: = https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00 = Htmlized: = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-dtls = Diff: = https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=3Ddraft-ietf-babel-dtls-00&url2=3Ddraft-= decimo-babel-dtls-01 = Thanks, David Schinazi > On Aug 7, 2018, at 10:24, Donald Eastlake wrote: >=20 > Based on the mailing list response, this draft is adopted by the BABEL > WG. The authors should prepare and post a draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00. >=20 > There were some suggestions for improvement posted during the call for > adoption. I would recommend that the authors post a -00 as above with > no changes other than those needed to make it a WG draft and then > consider posting a -01 version incorporating some of the suggested > improvements. >=20 > Thanks, > Donald > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Donald Eastlake = wrote: >> This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. >> Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit >> longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you >> think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also >> welcome. >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Donald >> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) >> 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA >> d3e3e3@gmail.com >=20 > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel --Apple-Mail=_6E44BA56-06CA-4BC0-93AE-4E97FFB82270 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Thank= you Donald.

I've = submitted draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00 with the same text = as draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01.

Name: draft-ietf-babel-dtls
Revision: 00
Title: Babel Routing Protocol over Datagram Transport Layer = Security
Document date: 2018-08-15
Group: babel
Pages: 8
URL: =            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00.t= xt
Status: =         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-dtls/
Htmlized: =       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00
Htmlized: =       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-dtls=
Diff:     =   https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=3Ddraft-ietf-babel-dtls-00&am= p;url2=3Ddraft-decimo-babel-dtls-01

Thanks,
David = Schinazi


On Aug = 7, 2018, at 10:24, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:

Based = on the mailing list response, this draft is adopted by the BABEL
WG. The authors should prepare and post a = draft-ietf-babel-dtls-00.

There were some = suggestions for improvement posted during the call for
adoption. I would recommend that the authors post a -00 as = above with
no changes other than those needed to make it a = WG draft and then
consider posting a -01 version = incorporating some of the suggested
improvements.

Thanks,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd =   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
1424 Pro Shop Court, = Davenport, FL 33896 USA
d3e3e3@gmail.com


On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> = wrote:
This message = begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls.
Since = this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit
longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate = whether you
think this draft should be adopted. Comments = on the draft also
welcome.

Thanks,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd =   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
1424 Pro Shop Court, = Davenport, FL 33896 USA
d3e3e3@gmail.com

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

= --Apple-Mail=_6E44BA56-06CA-4BC0-93AE-4E97FFB82270-- From nobody Wed Aug 15 15:09:28 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5DC1286E3; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:09:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5pQRIU_Nj3AK; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:09:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com [17.171.2.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6EB2124BE5; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:09:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com [127.0.0.1]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w7FM6iUN015904; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:09:23 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apple.com; h=mime-version : content-transfer-encoding : content-type : sender : subject : from : in-reply-to : date : cc : message-id : references : to; s=20180706; bh=sQ7jCQJYr2fP2IYHrYA+5E6KQaDdLefj+ht7jKlnp3E=; b=dvW8ulVKcwgPM9PsXcsb5zGfCvzcoV6D9MHtX1vni95HW1BufnY/pNXlGEb1NbCW8obd 3YqszoXLGT4KSVwR3P3f5Hzh9fkFJrx6p7ApxNdP0qeBuiCBhTonvMbp6ZzbhkVZ7xt1 Bnio1g9pk0mU8c42oIsj35aw2XD3qbVwwYH7YTN/0uTu0TMSGdc+zbM9w/UgnnvVNz7G Y4jZSFlgUuXeVqBkyZhATQ+95WJ5YmL1RRLVcqUk03r33tsOeZ1Gr16Qc5Vekkb3X+5H /Dxv/kWwRFRI3QLTKIuoB+KXZah9UkMfXB3Nqn2Y5EQM2shcjj3txPs30YpQv6xZU9kT 1w== Received: from crk-mtap-sz03.euro.apple.com (crk-mtap-sz03.euro.apple.com [17.66.12.163]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com with ESMTP id 2ksxsy72uf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:09:23 -0700 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com (crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com [17.66.55.18]) by crk-mtap-sz03.euro.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PDI00J7UW7MXY00@crk-mtap-sz03.euro.apple.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:09:22 +0100 (IST) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com by crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180629 64bit (built Jun 29 2018)) id <0PDI00B00VVHDD00@crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:09:22 +0100 (IST) X-Va-A: X-Va-T-CD: e37ecdf785950a8d40541851ee1b14bc X-Va-E-CD: 676240cb6abad5068ad623caebc8e9e7 X-Va-R-CD: 6ff44530092eeb32a36e7a370fae4fb3 X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: 7938d243-4d48-41c4-9cac-a10f6f04bbb1 X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: e37ecdf785950a8d40541851ee1b14bc X-V-E-CD: 676240cb6abad5068ad623caebc8e9e7 X-V-R-CD: 6ff44530092eeb32a36e7a370fae4fb3 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: ec3e0cc4-a40d-45cd-b189-e0399d4b70b6 Received: from process_milters-daemon.crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com by crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180629 64bit (built Jun 29 2018)) id <0PDI00B00VU5C600@crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:09:21 +0100 (IST) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-08-15_08:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: ma-grpmailp-qapp23.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from crk-mmpp-sz03.euro.apple.com (crk-mmpp-sz03.euro.apple.com [17.66.12.165]) by crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180629 64bit (built Jun 29 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PDI00AK4W7JKB00@crk-relayp-sz01.euro.apple.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:09:19 +0100 (IST) Received: from [17.192.155.180] by crk-mmpp-sz03.euro.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PDI00GRHW7G9O70@crk-mmpp-sz03.euro.apple.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:09:19 +0100 (IST) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi In-reply-to: Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:09:15 -0700 Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Message-id: <9E93C704-66A0-40B8-89B7-BCD9EA99388F@apple.com> References: To: Donald Eastlake X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-08-15_08:, , signatures=0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-decimo/ietf-babel-dtls X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 22:09:26 -0000 Hello Donald, I am not personally aware of any IPR in draft-decimo-babel-dtls for which a declaration had not yet been filed with the IETF. Thanks, David Schinazi > On Aug 7, 2018, at 10:29, Donald Eastlake wrote: > > Hi, > > This is a call for any IPR declaration for draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01. > The authors must respond indicating whether they are personally aware > of any IPR in this draft for which a declaration had not yet be filed > with the IETF. > > Thanks, > Donald > =============================== > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel From nobody Wed Aug 15 15:41:11 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A454E130DCF; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:41:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LUJYRVd6Icb5; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64EC2126CC7; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:41:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w7FMeFdx024893; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:40:15 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623C7EB200; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id Pn_KBJHcCXmm; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (user-164-126-177-200.play-internet.pl [164.126.177.200]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 814E8EB22D; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:04 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:00 +0200 Message-ID: <87tvnvw8w3.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <87600ht7c0.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <87600ht7c0.wl-jch@irif.fr> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:40:15 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B74ABCF.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B74ABCF.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B74ABCF.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-do/ietf-babel-hmac X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 22:41:11 -0000 > I do not hold any IPR related to draft-do-babel-hmac-00. I am not aware of any IPR relevant to draft-do-babel-hmac-00. (I'm being told by a friendly onlooker that my previous formulation was not good enough.) -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Aug 15 15:41:59 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1AFA130DD9; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:41:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RA74DkjaMsc5; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:41:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 434F4126CC7; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:41:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w7FMf3ko025063; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:03 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45ABAEB200; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:54 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 1yYKQF1xRXXy; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (user-164-126-177-200.play-internet.pl [164.126.177.200]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F0E1EB22D; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:52 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:49 +0200 Message-ID: <87sh3fw8uq.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <874lg1t7bg.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <874lg1t7bg.wl-jch@irif.fr> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:41:03 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B74ABFF.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B74ABFF.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B74ABFF.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-decimo/ietf-babel-dtls X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 22:41:58 -0000 > I do not hold any IPR related to draft-decimo-ietf-bael-dtls. I am not aware of any IPR related to draft-decimo-ietf-babel-dtls. From nobody Wed Aug 15 23:16:57 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6EA4130EE4; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:16:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qm3iFIOEeGRk; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:16:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22f.google.com (mail-it0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2840130E6F; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id h23-v6so5208926ita.5; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:16:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=31IQdcwDaW6m3jkA6zHrRV0dql8gply/CWN0659+xX0=; b=C9D+e6IfaaQZL2wOvHlYycfrONdXva0Fxjr3Dzf828k738wXnOTm8jN6HKlW5vhbUE j7ecLXuwp7PsV5FdJFVVQT+5HkGdd4Vnb+I/GipkflKen68g1EL7oWVLO03dI6dU2EN5 artq8NZoyK+h+AoXSCLdFyU2M1WruViuOoWgDycl+7g59R/pY5HHLIxuVwXk0tOr8toL 2eoggZEJ5nyIUOLGiRPprNlK+AzjCplynDM4clS90KB/rnND/a+Tsss2MchUMzxnpmYA W3Bqc+5m9X0w9Kvm9XBkiimqiotlJ/VWSiDN5VsJOOtyvxFFjtz6lNxat4MTXTiH2pTq OJcQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=31IQdcwDaW6m3jkA6zHrRV0dql8gply/CWN0659+xX0=; b=tKJ8MK/oywOhlu8+4Lp2nlfrIz7rmo9anfTYPatf0WRfQsp1ZCwTmWnAAYucnWghW1 zd6CcgkNjTtHl/SY/1vKB1cZQNR1yIc1Iv7/RF21inMXWawo01ST2FACA3TGKGUNsTyL a+ayMmULOxqGbq+gl+kdEfPMlG/t1+KJsXZzGaZx7SMsnMqLYC/zpV/6+hOhssqCcGx0 51iFb4e0sJ8NOt6gXNtBWY1jbFKql17r3C4botpLwjBajkEgq/opX/3jo+AvMnPLXEV2 UCnJvnhrypKF9mkZ8iQy9ogPdu0Y37qXKys31G4RCJm1sxN2gOWIawiaAMLiv/h/pdHx 69ew== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGrPn79g4w5DHAUUiUOWL6E2NVax3nmHzMzXmMmcl2AyFnAJ5B3 EnsGxcC380TUHUQSNwG/qEQnCI/7Ur4YGpwDjhk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPxiiImfDLwN9+yI1ND7rfRaT9rITrpmZrRbTqDEFJ7vq1v76ReOsHM3YrKRZ/Hi09qEdk40Yk3/qiQzXH9RCgM= X-Received: by 2002:a24:ef43:: with SMTP id i64-v6mr20306276ith.47.1534400212907; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 23:16:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <874lg1t7bg.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87sh3fw8uq.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87sh3fw8uq.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Antonin_D=C3=A9cimo?= Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:16:40 +0300 Message-ID: To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Donald Eastlake , babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a23dca05738763b3" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-decimo/ietf-babel-dtls X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:16:56 -0000 --000000000000a23dca05738763b3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am not personally aware of any IPR in draft-decimo-babel-dtls for which a declaration had not yet been filed with the IETF. Antonin D=C3=A9cimo --000000000000a23dca05738763b3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am not personally aware of any IPR in draft-decimo-babe= l-dtls for which a declaration had not yet been filed with the IETF.

Antonin D=C3=A9cimo
--000000000000a23dca05738763b3-- From nobody Thu Aug 16 14:16:44 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 626B0130E40; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:16:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.83.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: babel@ietf.org Message-ID: <153445419636.12204.5122050411968014117@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:16:36 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] I-D Action: draft-ietf-babel-hmac-00.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 21:16:37 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Babel routing protocol WG of the IETF. Title : Babel Cryptographic Authentification Authors : Clara Do Weronika Kolodziejak Juliusz Chroboczek Filename : draft-ietf-babel-hmac-00.txt Pages : 17 Date : 2018-08-16 Abstract: This document describes a cryptographic authentication mechanism for the Babel routing protocol that has provisions for replay avoidance. This document updates RFC 6126bis and obsoletes RFC 7298. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-babel-hmac/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-babel-hmac-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-hmac-00 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sun Aug 26 10:57:39 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C3E128CE4; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 10:57:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 94o0zCAKhNaR; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 10:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x232.google.com (mail-it0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 343A112426A; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 10:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x232.google.com with SMTP id g18-v6so8211114itg.2; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 10:57:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=f09BY1Kq7ypuqW8yEpgQUnmPeSUVMc8PMxbpClaRPbY=; b=jx+l5Hej0bZLIkZr49J0T1gq1+fG50p+5En25GxS0fLLIV5vLeH56n1R2in90XqTlW 3ZTQFf1Wu5jeg4KG5f1sPtDFc2zudycFl0ZIpHX4a7CwLmy1WmivT3KYbd5ukcH0LZoX MKpdSN44o4squ8kt7Y1142PkfMCPhvJgNr8Oilj4b8GC33+SBzIKE5OxcrmZf4DDcqRK s2+oQc9W3FCXGDmMThyvkHUV693MDAhMmL49bX6CXY+En4yvD556ljgpkQ8/2v2qrnaB Djv4nJVEay0Z6GiV2reHNQ9NuJAuvY5/g7Bx5M24zvWIX2f5lKzWqHCP3MbU0CPrxkHh sWpg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=f09BY1Kq7ypuqW8yEpgQUnmPeSUVMc8PMxbpClaRPbY=; b=kqHFK49eb70hlnLRicdoqsD9szrww/FE0W/3mpE2/IgDhIUFtRuqIVnQcGab3nRh4q W4Btwx66dyo/EySV9Ux6WQLgXYIRmoeorpA7vTccaB0FAf3ZmGCAztlDda6ty7t3gFbB d+8q4FnJh8d5FVH+1Gr86zMxRHM1G75h+y6EpPV8VRoVvGkKfYHQDUeaAJ4YxRfu34u6 /kveol46GIycEp7tqd+kU6UlvL2XMLubLcdX4sR4KPRuiT+r8YLUgOVnzsJui9xeMOvM ZWXO4uECJohMULr/51G4TofjEas39KSZqjOhP3MGD7tZPb8ffYvvXDJNR/GfvxM1qrcc dmgw== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51Bl5tqc8TQ7oIcd9hPUrteNH7k6mYzV386H6bxRYiAWPrLmSIJ6 QIu4M9k6vD1TdFXfxyACMRDA19/ONQmsRS45or3Nvg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdYWJvQOfCi7/3QD/QV6tWaQSbT7JDN7MUYivQ08wOmaE/Euzj58r1EUPUkyXpadd+be6R/JfOcc0//7LQAo/+g= X-Received: by 2002:a02:1e11:: with SMTP id m17-v6mr7806466jad.17.1535306255079; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 10:57:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:244b:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 10:57:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE5346B@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 13:57:19 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: "babel-chairs@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Suggested Babel Milestones Revision X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 17:57:38 -0000 Hi, Since the only comment on the milestones was the typo in the year of the last one, with that fix I'll go ahead and update the milestones. Thanks, Donald (co-Chair) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > Hi Barbara, > > Yes, the last item is supposed to be 2019. Sorry for the error. > > Thanks, > Donald > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 8:33 AM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote: >> I think the last item is supposed to be 2019, not 2018? BTW, it now appe= ars we may actually be able to get that model done earlier than that. >> >> Markus: I don't think you need to do anything rash yet, like learning YA= NG. I'm working with another volunteer (slight arm-twisting involved) who h= as significant YANG expertise. =F0=9F=98=8A >> Barbara >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> Hi, >>> >>> Attached are the suggested milestones, modified from those presented at >>> the Babel WG meeting earlier this month as discussed at that meeting. >>> Comments welcome. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Donald >>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) >>> 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Sun Aug 26 11:16:20 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD3BF130DF4 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 11:16:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.83.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <153530737890.11902.1319212602300372471.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 11:16:18 -0700 From: IETF Secretariat Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Milestones changed for babel WG X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 18:16:19 -0000 Changed milestone "IESG Submission of Babel Applicability draft (Informational)", set due date to August 2018 from August 2017, added draft-ietf-babel-applicability to milestone. Changed milestone "IESG Submission of RFC6126bis and potentially companion security mechanisms draft (Proposed Standard)", set due date to October 2018 from July 2017, added draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis to milestone. Changed milestone "IESG Submission of Babel Management draft (Proposed Standard)", set due date to June 2019 from July 2017. URL: https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/babel/about/ From nobody Mon Aug 27 07:04:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7B43130DD7; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:03:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IETF Meeting Session Request Tool To: Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, d3e3e3@gmail.com, martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.83.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <153537863861.30000.5918235871113037924.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:03:58 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] babel - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 103 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 14:03:59 -0000 A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd, a Chair of the babel working group. --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Babel routing protocol Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Donald Eastlake Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 1.5 Hours Number of Attendees: 40 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: rtgwg idr homenet manet bess Second Priority: dnsop i2rs mptcp saag lpwan lsr Third Priority: dnssd tsvwg netconf netmod People who must be present: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd Russ White Martin Vigoureux Resources Requested: Special Requests: Meeting toward the end of the day Thursday or in the last slot Thursday has worked well for BABEL. --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Tue Aug 28 12:44:56 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCEFF130E05; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:44:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JLBSW3fCKxGc; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-x12d.google.com (mail-lf1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0C4C128CB7; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:44:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id x26-v6so2360623lfi.7; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:44:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=DHTX5guELKkVHcoub1yGZsImSHReT8mb0rZPPmOhh7c=; b=YC6dAGvcUPiYWdWQVVfq5gbvPhHNfVPn6Jm/I5TmdVWNXP6pUy6VYXUxxIS34APmh6 AbUV1x2nRBEgFQveizv5i5owHnCcQDeXIq/In8dWwVvXFWhQ9NC+2QBQSqhTKXiOGL9a 24R6oxnBxP9eGfqr1po/UkICUbg2PyT5YfPPZ6u7kx3WVz03/EFjVgXLRBu9hu/N32+Z CIZSpZ4VnRYua3zGVHbdl4jn6Olla9DTNRadFjGHD73Kvnm1GDVMTC+NdjGnLlQUPZ3v nc+Na3UrjgF8ySRnGcx/8RZjSOUsEs5NyQjTyrd1B9YP9Bi8Ewd8oeYc5O3o6igIedKN Ks6A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=DHTX5guELKkVHcoub1yGZsImSHReT8mb0rZPPmOhh7c=; b=uFpa9CG8zinzKkLks48ndsCUv6QH3ZyGa2bSCOMnLFeXCzZXnKUtQ+rR8SAPdzrjar OSOlN1xdvv3NkbH3M7Nb0VkVWzYzsmwhWeUG78KDHgDspKEJuSWPZ/x6liLhhzoJ92L7 gXGmu6+0npo/ZCzcYWECIV1n+m9aFzEgxZePbWVcs/aaOhu05evoh2PSC15CiXpq5piU MQchq1eNrtrN69iJkR4hln35tUJ7gvilN7/7Hbp/oo3NMTFvIrR8js06+LJ7ylHYTyHM Yfmy/fkiqSWDsQEGFVmC843zB5vD091o7pOdvPyawuhM9IHyi1YqgSGnUL7aK7QYGW4C 54WA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51BJxnwrD/0jF8VwisSJ9DbCkpk3ocsEp8UwRds/WO34zkk4A7KB 4egGg4O2ThpLUKT4czp81wKP1TxpO1SQ1Od8bivaVA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbSSH29V62dkdxAU8k4XtvVMCQq4W1zZz1rt0V/8hlwvs4JNnY9eHUNTevyYuFgpD/FU+nCiUqe9LUkVqRP5o4= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:418b:: with SMTP id z11-v6mr2094613lfh.3.1535485490113; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:44:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Weronika_Ko=C5=82odziejak?= Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 21:44:38 +0200 Message-ID: To: d3e3e3@gmail.com Cc: babel@ietf.org, babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000032362b05748413e3" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Call for draft-do/ietf-babel-hmac X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 19:44:54 -0000 --00000000000032362b05748413e3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Donald, I am not aware of any IPR related to draft-do-babel-hmac-00. Weronika Ko=C5=82odziejak W dniu =C5=9Broda, 8 sierpnia 2018 Donald Eastlake napis= a=C5=82(a): > Hi, > > This is a call for any IPR declaration for draft-do-babel-hmac-00. > The authors must respond indicating whether they are personally aware > of any IPR in this draft for which a declaration had not yet be filed > with the IETF. > > Thanks, > Donald > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --00000000000032362b05748413e3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Donald,

I am not aware of a= ny IPR related to draft-do-babel-hmac-00.

Weronika Ko=C5= =82odziejak

W dniu =C5=9Broda, 8 sierpnia 2018 Donald Eastlake <<= a href=3D"mailto:d3e3e3@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">d3e3e3@gmail.com&g= t; napisa=C5=82(a):
Hi,

This is a call for any IPR declaration for draft-do-babel-hmac-00.
The authors must respond indicating whether they are personally aware
of any IPR in this draft for which a declaration had not yet be filed
with the IETF.

Thanks,
Donald
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=C2=A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd=C2=A0 =C2=A0+1-508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2=A01424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail.co= m

_______________________________________________
babel mailing list
babel@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel
--00000000000032362b05748413e3--