Subject: [Dots] Indefinite (-1) lifetime parameter value in a mitigation request

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 15:04:03 +0000

Hi all,

In reference to the comment raised by Flemming during the interim meeting about the indefinite lifetime, I would like to remind that value was introduced in the signal channel draft to adhere to this requirement from draft-ietf-dots-requirements:

      DOTS servers SHOULD support indefinite mitigation lifetimes,
      enabling architectures in which the mitigator is always in the
      traffic path to the resources for which the DOTS client is
      requesting protection.  DOTS servers MAY refuse mitigations with
      indefinite lifetimes, for policy reasons.  The reasons themselves
      are out of scope for this document, but MUST be included in the
      mitigation rejection message from the server, per SIG-005.

Cheers,
Med

---

From: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 06:36:41 +0000

Artyom has posted a similar use case (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/J4eAz-511qAHw2pnUkXxNr558Dc) to add to the use cases draft, an End-customer with an upstream transit provider or MSSP offering DDoS mitigation services on the permanent basis.
I don't see a problem with this use case and below requirement.

-Tiru

From: Dots [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:34 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Dots] Indefinite (-1) lifetime parameter value in a mitigation request

Hi all,

Cheers,
Med

---

From: "Jon Shallow" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 10:00:47 +0100

This works for me as well.

From: Dots [mailto: [email-masked]] On Behalf Of Konda, Tirumaleswar
Reddy
Sent: 16 October 2017 07:37
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Dots] Indefinite (-1) lifetime parameter value in a mitigation
request

Artyom has posted a similar use case (
<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/J4eAz-511qAHw2pnUkXxNr558Dc>
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/J4eAz-511qAHw2pnUkXxNr558Dc) to
add to the use cases draft, an End-customer with an upstream transit
provider or MSSP offering DDoS mitigation services on the permanent basis. 

-Tiru

From: Dots [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
[email-masked]
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:34 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Dots] Indefinite (-1) lifetime parameter value in a mitigation
request

Hi all, 

In reference to the comment raised by Flemming during the interim meeting
about the indefinite lifetime, I would like to remind that value was
introduced in the signal channel draft to adhere to this requirement from
draft-ietf-dots-requirements: 

Cheers,

Med