From nea-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 17 00:16:21 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDZIj-0005Ku-9S; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:16:13 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDZIh-0005Kp-4v for nea@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:16:11 -0400 Received: from [207.47.37.170] (helo=SCES1.sc.nevisnetworks.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDZIf-0002N4-Oy for nea@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:16:11 -0400 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: PING: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:16:02 -0700 Message-ID: <126EBB1F0092E14B9E595D03263235AAC0048F@SCES1.sc.nevisnetworks.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PING: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Thread-Index: AcalKRfO+PMqaWq2RTmBQ4LOO4SLUgBWMNIwAAJvx3ADYxPloANm8kYg From: "Joseph Tardo" To: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" , "Stephen Hanna" , , "Russ Housley" , "Sam Hartman" , X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52f7a77164458f8c7b36b66787c853da Cc: X-BeenThere: nea@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Network Endpoint Assessment discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: nea-bounces@ietf.org Hi Steve Any news on the formation of the WG? By when will we get the final word? The BoF was successful, but we haven't heard of anything after that. Thanks Joe -----Original Message----- From: Khosravi, Hormuzd M [mailto:hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com]=20 Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 1:39 PM To: Stephen Hanna; nea@ietf.org; Russ Housley; Sam Hartman; saag@mit.edu Subject: RE: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Hi Steve Any news on the formation of the WG? By when will we get the final word? The BoF was successful, but we haven't heard of anything after that. Thanks Hormuzd -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Hanna [mailto:shanna@juniper.net]=20 Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 8:06 AM To: nea@ietf.org; Russ Housley; Sam Hartman; saag@mit.edu Subject: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Summary of NEA BOF at IETF 66 The NEA BOF focussed on discussing and agreeing on a charter for a potential NEA WG. As part of this, there was considerable discussion of the NEA use case, architecture, and scope. The session was well attended (more than 100 people). Many good questions and issues were raised, all in a constructive manner. These concerns will be reviewed to determine whether architectural changes may be needed. At the end of the session, rough consensus was reached on a revised scope. The scope in the previously proposed charter will be modified to require that the WG identify a Mandatory To Implement transport (which may be developed by another WG). Also, vendor attributes would be required to be documented in an RFC. And the protocols developed must be designed to accomodate emerging technologies for addressing lying endpoints. With these changes, rough consensus was reached that the IETF should create a WG with this scope and the previously proposed goals. A substantial number of BOF participants indicated they would help edit and author documents. The BOF chairs will work with the ADs, the mailing list, and others to prepare a revised charter reflecting the BOF's rough consensus. This charter will be submitted to the IESG for consideration. _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea From nea-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 17 13:44:45 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDlvB-00051L-Mk; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:44:45 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDlOb-0004HD-VK for nea@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:11:05 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.182]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDlJe-00035H-6u for nea@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:05:59 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id c39so768335pyd for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:05:57 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=dw2N58aSiKF4QiM7a4Uyay1IvRwRIyOcWn0TOf/MtxdA+8w28+7oYRIF8ROc8r0TVy8NUp4nObvJOJDCa9verkWBboJ0Tw1weZpFsnktgwyzjPNm+UbL2eyMpUxqmKlK2x+hcYAprZGeI17BSpq/4l2b2D9AbZ0Ww2C00qI5AeA= Received: by 10.35.51.19 with SMTP id d19mr3925803pyk; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:05:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.92.6 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:05:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <88ec15490608171005y2ad2aa1dmf4b3a3056d848e67@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:05:57 -0400 From: "Stephanie Tan" To: nea@ietf.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: X-Spam-Score: 0.9 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:44:44 -0400 Subject: [Nea] Re: Nea Digest, Vol 10, Issue 2 X-BeenThere: nea@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Network Endpoint Assessment discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0961254139==" Errors-To: nea-bounces@ietf.org --===============0961254139== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6064_5593318.1155834357683" ------=_Part_6064_5593318.1155834357683 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Does anyone know whether Microsoft and Cisco will be participating and potentially contributing/conforming to the standards in relation to IETF and TCG TNC? ------=_Part_6064_5593318.1155834357683 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Does anyone know whether Microsoft and Cisco will be participating and potentially contributing/conforming to the standards in relation to IETF and TCG TNC?
------=_Part_6064_5593318.1155834357683-- --===============0961254139== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea --===============0961254139==-- From nea-bounces@ietf.org Thu Aug 17 14:24:07 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDmX9-0003OJ-1b; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:23:59 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDmUQ-0002uR-1v for nea@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:21:10 -0400 Received: from mail1.microsoft.com ([131.107.1.6]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GDmUI-00025Y-G4 for nea@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:21:10 -0400 Received: from mailout6.microsoft.com ([157.54.69.150]) by mail1.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:21:01 -0700 Received: from tuk-hub-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.70.27]) by mailout6.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:21:01 -0700 Received: from tk1-exhub-c104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com ([157.56.116.117]) by tuk-hub-01.redmond.corp.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:21:01 -0700 Received: from win-imc-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com (157.54.0.39) by tk1-exhub-c104.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.56.116.117) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.0.605.0; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:20:59 -0700 Received: from WIN-MSG-21.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.24]) by win-imc-01.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2725); Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:20:58 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [Nea] Re: Nea Digest, Vol 10, Issue 2 Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:19:58 -0700 Message-ID: <5F3AAFB2FEC5ED4AA6DE79A3E0B47D800208F891@WIN-MSG-21.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> In-Reply-To: <88ec15490608171005y2ad2aa1dmf4b3a3056d848e67@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Nea] Re: Nea Digest, Vol 10, Issue 2 thread-index: AcbCJRCNvjM+BW54SMKnE/QA0bLUNgAABz/A References: <88ec15490608171005y2ad2aa1dmf4b3a3056d848e67@mail.gmail.com> From: Ryan Hurst To: "Stephanie Tan" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2006 18:20:58.0493 (UTC) FILETIME=[E3065AD0:01C6C229] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 17bdfcaea25d1444baef0e24abc38874 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:23:57 -0400 Cc: X-BeenThere: nea@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Network Endpoint Assessment discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1532762693==" Errors-To: nea-bounces@ietf.org --===============1532762693== Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C6C229.C126EFDD" ------_=_NextPart_001_01C6C229.C126EFDD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stephanie - I cannot speak for CISCO, but from a Microsoft perspective we have agreed to offer our equivalents of the protocols that are in scope of the current draft charter under royalty free terms. =20 Early documentation for these messages are available on the Microsoft website right now, I have recently re-wrote this documentation to be more clear and in the (relatively) near future expect a updated version of these documents to go live; I unfortunately do not have a hard date for this. I should also note that we have also documented our APIs so that others can integrate with our solution without implementing these wire protocols (if appropriate for their solutions). =20 As for your question about Microsoft's participation in this working group, I still have concern about the charter being too narrow, too focused on the current implementations protocols and fear the result as scoped right now will be just another way to accomplish one small part of a NAC system. =20 I know that Steve and Susan are working on a revised charter, and without seeing that its difficult to say how much we will be participating, the decision to implement a protocol is a complicated one that lots of factors go into and I just can't answer that at this time.=20 =20 My current thinking is that I will do my best to share our understanding of this problem area and our solution but without seeing the revised charter I can't really make any commitments beyond that. =20 Ryan =20 From: Stephanie Tan [mailto:stephanie.tan@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:06 AM To: nea@ietf.org Subject: [Nea] Re: Nea Digest, Vol 10, Issue 2 =20 Does anyone know whether Microsoft and Cisco will be participating and potentially contributing/conforming to the standards in relation to IETF and TCG TNC? ------_=_NextPart_001_01C6C229.C126EFDD Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Stephanie - I cannot speak for CISCO, but from a = Microsoft perspective we have agreed to offer our equivalents of the protocols = that are in scope of the current draft charter under royalty free = terms.

 

Early documentation for these messages are available on = the Microsoft website right now, I have recently re-wrote this documentation to be = more clear and in the (relatively) near future expect a updated version of these = documents to go live; I unfortunately do not have a hard date for this. I should = also note that we have also documented our APIs so that others can integrate = with our solution without implementing these wire protocols (if appropriate = for their solutions).

 

As for your question about Microsoft’s = participation in this working group, I still have concern about the charter being too = narrow, too focused on the current implementations protocols and fear the result as = scoped right now will be just another way to accomplish one small part of a NAC system.

 

I know that Steve and Susan are working on a revised = charter, and without seeing that its difficult to say how much we will be = participating, the decision to implement a protocol is a complicated one that lots of = factors go into and I just can’t answer that at this time. =

 

My current thinking is that I will do my best to share = our understanding of this problem area and our solution but without seeing = the revised charter I can’t really make any commitments beyond = that.

 

Ryan

 

From: Stephanie = Tan [mailto:stephanie.tan@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:06 AM
To: nea@ietf.org
Subject: [Nea] Re: Nea Digest, Vol 10, Issue = 2

 

Does anyone know whether Microsoft and Cisco will = be participating and potentially contributing/conforming to the standards = in relation to IETF and TCG TNC?

------_=_NextPart_001_01C6C229.C126EFDD-- --===============1532762693== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea --===============1532762693==-- From nea-bounces@ietf.org Fri Aug 18 11:30:04 2006 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GE6I7-00065l-T8; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:29:47 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GE6I6-00065g-LA for nea@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:29:46 -0400 Received: from borg.juniper.net ([207.17.137.119]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GE6I5-0000ZA-AQ for nea@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:29:46 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO proton.jnpr.net) ([10.10.2.37]) by borg.juniper.net with ESMTP; 18 Aug 2006 08:28:03 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.08,146,1154934000"; d="scan'208"; a="578681729:sNHT72412360" x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: PING: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:29:39 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <126EBB1F0092E14B9E595D03263235AAC0048F@SCES1.sc.nevisnetworks.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: PING: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Thread-Index: AcalKRfO+PMqaWq2RTmBQ4LOO4SLUgBWMNIwAAJvx3ADYxPloANm8kYgACP/LvA= From: "Stephen Hanna" To: "Joseph Tardo" , "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" , , "Russ Housley" , "Sam Hartman" , X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a2c12dacc0736f14d6b540e805505a86 Cc: X-BeenThere: nea@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Network Endpoint Assessment discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: nea-bounces@ietf.org There's an echo in here, I think. ;-) My response to Hormuzd's earlier email was: > Susan and I are working on the revised charter. I hope we'll have > something back to the NEA list within a few weeks. The timeline for > an eventual IESG decision is more uncertain but I expect it would not > be more than a month or two. I'm afraid that report is still pretty much accurate. I'm sorry things are taking longer than I hoped. I guess that's the downside of being an engineer. My estimates are usually far too optimistic. And August is not the best time to do this. People take vacations. Let me assure you that we are making progress. I'll get a revised charter out to the nea@ietf.org list ASAP. And I promise to keep you posted as things move along. Thanks, Steve -----Original Message----- From: Joseph Tardo [mailto:joseph.tardo@nevisnetworks.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:16 AM To: Khosravi, Hormuzd M; Stephen Hanna; nea@ietf.org; Russ Housley; Sam Hartman; saag@mit.edu Subject: PING: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Hi Steve Any news on the formation of the WG? By when will we get the final word? The BoF was successful, but we haven't heard of anything after that. Thanks Joe -----Original Message----- From: Khosravi, Hormuzd M [mailto:hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com]=20 Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 1:39 PM To: Stephen Hanna; nea@ietf.org; Russ Housley; Sam Hartman; saag@mit.edu Subject: RE: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Hi Steve Any news on the formation of the WG? By when will we get the final word? The BoF was successful, but we haven't heard of anything after that. Thanks Hormuzd -----Original Message----- From: Stephen Hanna [mailto:shanna@juniper.net]=20 Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 8:06 AM To: nea@ietf.org; Russ Housley; Sam Hartman; saag@mit.edu Subject: [Nea] IETF 66 NEA BOF Summary Summary of NEA BOF at IETF 66 The NEA BOF focussed on discussing and agreeing on a charter for a potential NEA WG. As part of this, there was considerable discussion of the NEA use case, architecture, and scope. The session was well attended (more than 100 people). Many good questions and issues were raised, all in a constructive manner. These concerns will be reviewed to determine whether architectural changes may be needed. At the end of the session, rough consensus was reached on a revised scope. The scope in the previously proposed charter will be modified to require that the WG identify a Mandatory To Implement transport (which may be developed by another WG). Also, vendor attributes would be required to be documented in an RFC. And the protocols developed must be designed to accomodate emerging technologies for addressing lying endpoints. With these changes, rough consensus was reached that the IETF should create a WG with this scope and the previously proposed goals. A substantial number of BOF participants indicated they would help edit and author documents. The BOF chairs will work with the ADs, the mailing list, and others to prepare a revised charter reflecting the BOF's rough consensus. This charter will be submitted to the IESG for consideration. _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea _______________________________________________ Nea mailing list Nea@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea