From rpsec-bounces@ietf.org Thu Dec 01 13:23:54 2005
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32)
	id 1Eht62-0006XU-4o; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:23:54 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Eht61-0006XL-28
	for rpsec@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:23:53 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1])
	by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28338
	for <rpsec@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 13:23:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149])
	by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EhtQX-0008PV-4w
	for rpsec@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:45:06 -0500
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13])
	by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Dec 2005 13:23:43 -0500
X-IronPort-AV: i="3.99,202,1131339600"; 
	d="txt'?sig'?scan'208"; a="76863875:sNHT56377328"
Received: from RussPC (rtp-vpn2-295.cisco.com [10.82.241.39])
	by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id jB1INZds026420
	for <rpsec@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 13:23:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by RussPC (PGP Universal service);
	Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:23:38 -0500
X-PGP-Universal: processed;
	by RussPC on Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:23:38 -0500
Message-ID: <438F3F9F.30907@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:23:27 -0500
From: Russ White <riw@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rpsec@ietf.org
X-PGP-Encoding-Version: 2.0.2
X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ec7c6dab5a62df223002ae71b5179d41
Subject: [RPSEC] Charter Update
X-BeenThere: rpsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Protocol Security Requirements  <rpsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>,
	<mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/rpsec>
List-Post: <mailto:rpsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>,
	<mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1325386863=="
Sender: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org


--===============1325386863==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	micalg="pgp-sha1";
	boundary="PGP_Universal_FEBE6D7A_AD1BC4AB_E622A486_D7F819C1"


--PGP_Universal_FEBE6D7A_AD1BC4AB_E622A486_D7F819C1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------080206040104070409080703"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------080206040104070409080703
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Y'all:

We'd=20like=20to=20modify=20the=20charter=20to=20reflect=20our=20current=20=
progress=20of=20work,=20
and=20ass=20some=20new=20things=20to=20it.=20Comments=20welcome=20before=20=
I=20send=20it=20off=20to=20
the=20IESG.=20The=20one=20possibly=20new=20item=20that=20I'd=20like=20som=
e=20thought=20on=20is=20if=20
there's=20a=20place=20for=20this=20one:

Mar=2006=20Submit=20initial=20document=20discussing=20requirements=20for=20=
peering
relationship=20authorization=20and=20authentication=20mechanisms.

:-)

Russ


--=20
riw=40cisco.com=20CCIE=20=3C=3E=3C=20Grace=20Alone


--------------080206040104070409080703
Content-Type: text/plain;
 name="charter-11-05.txt"
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="charter-11-05.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The=20lack=20of=20a=20common=20set=20of=20security=20requirements=20and=20=
methods=20for
routing=20protocols=20has=20resulted=20in=20a=20wide=20variety=20of=20sec=
urity
mechanisms=20for=20individual=20routing=20protocols.=20Ongoing=20work=20o=
n
requirements=20for=20the=20next=20generation=20routing=20system=20and=20f=
uture=20work=20on
the=20actual=20mechanisms=20for=20it=20will=20require=20well=20documented=
=20routing
security=20requirements.

The=20products=20of=20this=20working=20group=20will=20be=20used=20by=20ro=
uting=20protocol
designers=20to=20ensure=20adequate=20coverage=20of=20security=20in=20the=20=
future,
including=20well=20known=20and=20possible=20threats.

The=20scope=20of=20work=20is=20limited=20to=20router-to-router=20protocol=
s=20for=20unicast
and=20multicast=20systems,=20and=20does=20NOT=20include=20host-to-router=20=
protocol
such=20as=20IGMP,=20ICMP,=20ARP,=20or=20ND.=20It=20is=20also=20a=20non-go=
al=20at=20this=20point=20to
produce=20new=20or=20change=20the=20current=20security=20mechanisms=20in=20=
the=20existing
routing=20protocols.

The=20RPSEC=20working=20group=20is=20charged=20with=20the=20following=20t=
asks:

-=20Document=20threat=20models=20for=20routing=20systems

-=20Document=20security=20requirements=20for=20routing=20systems

-=20Document=20security=20analysis=20and=20requirements=20for=20specific=20=
routing
=20=20protocols=20(e.g.,=20OSPF,=20BGP)

-=20Provide=20a=20common=20area=20for=20discussion=20between=20security=20=
and=20routing
=20=20experts=20on=20the=20topic=20of=20securing=20the=20routing=20system

Goals=20and=20Milestones:

Mar=2006=20Submit=20initial=20document=20discussing=20requirements=20for=20=
peering
relationship=20authorization=20and=20authentication=20mechanisms.

Mar=2006=20Submit=20BGP=20Attack-Tree=20analysis=20for=20publication=20as
Informational=20RFC.

Mar=2006=20Submit=20OSPF=20vulnerability=20analysis=20for=20publication=20=
as
Informational=20RFC.

Mar=2006=20Submit=20BGP=20security=20requirements=20for=20publication=20a=
s
Informational=20RFC.

July=2006=20Submit=20initial=20document=20discussing=20security=20require=
ments=20in=20an
OSPFv3=20mobile=20ad=20hoc=20environment

Oct=2006=20Evaluate=20progress,=20recharter=20with=20new=20goals=20or=20s=
hutdown.

--------------080206040104070409080703
Content-Type: text/plain;
 name="diffs.txt"
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="diffs.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

12,16c12,16
=3C=20The=20scope=20of=20work=20is=20limited=20to=20router-to-router=20pr=
otocols=20for=20unicast
=3C=20and=20multicast=20systems,=20and=20does=20NOT=20include=20host-to-r=
outer=20protocol
=3C=20such=20as=20IGMP,=20ICMP,=20ARP,=20or=20ND.=20It=20is=20also=20a=20=
non-goal=20at=20this=20point=20to
=3C=20produce=20new=20or=20change=20the=20current=20security=20mechanisms=
=20in=20the=20existing
=3C=20routing=20protocols.
---
=3E=20The=20scope=20of=20work=20is=20limited=20to=20router-to-router=20pr=
otocols=20only=20for
=3E=20both=20unicast=20and=20multicast=20systems,=20and=20does=20NOT=20in=
clude
=3E=20host-to-router=20protocol=20such=20as=20IGMP,=20ICMP,=20ARP,=20or=20=
ND.=20It=20is=20also=20a
=3E=20non-goal=20at=20this=20point=20to=20produce=20new=20or=20change=20t=
he=20current=20security
=3E=20mechanisms=20in=20the=20existing=20routing=20protocols.
25c25
=3C=20=20=20protocols=20(e.g.,=20OSPF,=20BGP)
---
=3E=20=20=20=20=20protocols=20(e.g.,=20OSPF,=20BGP)
28c28
=3C=20=20=20experts=20on=20the=20topic=20of=20securing=20the=20routing=20=
system
---
=3E=20=20=20=20=20experts=20on=20the=20topic=20of=20securing=20the=20rout=
ing=20system
30c30
=3C=20Goals=20and=20Milestones:
---
=3E=20Possible=20Future=20Work
32,33c32,33
=3C=20Mar=2006=20Submit=20initial=20document=20discussing=20requirements=20=
for=20peering
=3C=20relationship=20authorization=20and=20authentication=20mechanisms.
---
=3E=20-=20Evaluate=20and=20document=20existing=20and=20proposed=20routing=
=20security
=3E=20=20=20=20=20mechanisms=20with=20respect=20to=20established=20RPSEC=20=
requirements
35,47c35
=3C=20Mar=2006=20Submit=20BGP=20Attack-Tree=20analysis=20for=20publicatio=
n=20as
=3C=20Informational=20RFC.
=3C=20
=3C=20Mar=2006=20Submit=20OSPF=20vulnerability=20analysis=20for=20publica=
tion=20as
=3C=20Informational=20RFC.
=3C=20
=3C=20Mar=2006=20Submit=20BGP=20security=20requirements=20for=20publicati=
on=20as
=3C=20Informational=20RFC.
=3C=20
=3C=20July=2006=20Submit=20initial=20document=20discussing=20security=20r=
equirements=20in=20an
=3C=20OSPFv3=20mobile=20ad=20hoc=20environment
=3C=20
=3C=20Oct=2006=20Evaluate=20progress,=20recharter=20with=20new=20goals=20=
or=20shutdown.
---
=3E=20-=20Recommend=20mechanism(s)

--------------080206040104070409080703--

--PGP_Universal_FEBE6D7A_AD1BC4AB_E622A486_D7F819C1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	x-mac-type=70674453;
	name=PGP.sig
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=PGP.sig

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.3 (Build 2932)

iQA/AwUBQ48/qhEdu7FIVPTkEQK9TQCgrDjgBwxkEWWRCtKn5U0uftUwi0gAniGm
yBR2SRzh+EUvZWA8F6iB9UGi
=84T0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--PGP_Universal_FEBE6D7A_AD1BC4AB_E622A486_D7F819C1--


--===============1325386863==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec

--===============1325386863==--




From rpsec-bounces@ietf.org Thu Dec 01 17:21:34 2005
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32)
	id 1Ehwo2-0003aN-2y; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:21:34 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Ehwo1-0003aI-C4
	for rpsec@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:21:33 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1])
	by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA24022
	for <rpsec@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 17:20:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from aragorn.bbn.com ([128.33.0.62])
	by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ehx8X-0000be-Eu
	for rpsec@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:42:46 -0500
Received: from [128.89.89.106] (dhcp89-089-106.bbn.com [128.89.89.106])
	by aragorn.bbn.com (8.12.7/8.12.7) with ESMTP id jB1MLDIE018647;
	Thu, 1 Dec 2005 17:21:15 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06230905bfb526a3a8c3@[128.89.89.106]>
In-Reply-To: <438F3F9F.30907@cisco.com>
References: <438F3F9F.30907@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 17:21:09 -0500
To: Russ White <riw@cisco.com>
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Subject: Re: [RPSEC] Charter Update
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.83, clamav-milter version 0.83 on 128.33.1.41
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8
Cc: rpsec@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: rpsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Protocol Security Requirements  <rpsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>,
	<mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/rpsec>
List-Post: <mailto:rpsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>,
	<mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org

Russ,

I think the charter text looks OK, although the introductory sentence 
of you message had an amusing "s" -> "d: typo :-).


One comment about your suggestion for an additional work item:

"Mar 06 Submit initial document discussing requirements for peering
relationship authorization and authentication mechanisms."

I think it would be appropriate to focus on the authentication and 
integrity requirements here, rather than authorization. Presumably 
any authorization concerns can be addressed by using the 
authentication data for lookup in a local database, the exact nature 
of which might not require standardization.  But, if other folks 
think the authorization aspects of these peering relationships should 
be in scope, I'm OK with that too.

Steve

_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec



From rpsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Dec 13 08:29:57 2005
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32)
	id 1EmAE9-0006cl-Nt; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:29:57 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org)
	by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EmAE8-0006cZ-3W
	for rpsec@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:29:56 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1])
	by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA23479
	for <rpsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:28:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1])
	by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EmAEy-0008PE-3y
	for rpsec@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 08:30:50 -0500
Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost)
	by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id jBDDTXm13483
	for <rpsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:29:33 +0200
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:29:33 +0200 (EET)
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: rpsec@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0512131529001.13444@netcore.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009
Subject: [RPSEC] draft-ietf-rpsec-routing-threats-07.txt
X-BeenThere: rpsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Protocol Security Requirements  <rpsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>,
	<mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/rpsec>
List-Post: <mailto:rpsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>,
	<mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

What's the status of draft-ietf-rpsec-routing-threats-07.txt ?

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec



