Subject: [Rucus] Actions coming out of informal RUCUS meeting at IETF 73

From: Dan York <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 12:07:39 -0500

Folks,

At the informal RUCUS meeting at IETF 73 (see minutes here: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rucus/current/msg00347.html 
  ), part of the discussion was that while the charter for the RUCUS  
EG pointed at RFC 5039, that RFC alone does not provide the whole  
picture of the issues around SPIT/spam.  It was also pointed out that  
while many of us may be aware of various different situations related  
to SPIT, much of that information has not been captured in any formal  
written documents but exists more in email threads or informal  
conversations.

To that end, it was agreed that several people would write Internet- 
Drafts that document what is in fact going on out in actual  
deployments with regard to voice spam/SPIT and also spam in other areas.

The list I have of who said they would submit a document is the  
following:

- David Schwartz about email spam and lessons from there.
- David Schwartz about the XConnect / Kayote experience thus far with  
SPIT.
- Hannes Tschofenig about XMPP spam (and Hannes indicated he would  
contact Peter St. Andre)
- Hendrik Scholz about the recent German SPIT attack (Jan Seedorf  
offered to help)
- Juergen Quitteck/Jan Seedorf about some of the cases they have seen  
in their NEC incident database
- Jan Seedorf about the differences between DKIM and SIP Identity (Jan  
agreed but indicated he would need the assistance of others in the room)

It was agreed that these documents do NOT have to be long. They could  
be just a page or two if that is all it takes to summarize the  
incident/event/situation.  The main point is to provide some written  
background information for our continued discussions about SPIT and  
what the IETF can or cannot do (which would then lead to the brief  
mechanism-focused Internet-Drafts that are discussed in the RUCUS  
charter).

We also agreed that these documents would be submitted as Internet- 
Drafts because they then fit within the IETF workflow and are a  
standard format that others involved with the IETF (but not  
necessarily RUCUS) can find and understand.

We did not set a deadline at the meeting, but I would suggest that if  
we could perhaps aim to have these brief documents put together by the  
end of this month (Dec 2008) or by, say, January 15th, that would  
help.  I realize with holidays that may be tough, but as soon as  
possible would be great.  I'd like to make the case to the ADs that  
RUCUS should have a formal time slot at IETF 74, but for that to occur  
we need to have some forward momentum.  If we could have these summary  
documents in by mid-January, that gives us some time to pull together  
some mechanism-related drafts before the March meeting in SF that  
could then warrant some real face-to-face discussion.

Thanks to everyone who volunteered to write a document - and if there  
are others on this list who want to contribute a short document about  
experiences you have seen related to spam in general or specifically  
SPIT, please *do*!

Thanks,
Dan

-- 
Dan York, CISSP, Director of Emerging Communication Technology
Office of the CTO    Voxeo Corporation     [email-masked]
Phone: +1-407-455-5859  Skype: danyork  http://www.voxeo.com
Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com  http://www.disruptivetelephony.com

Build voice applications based on open standards.
Find out how at http://www.voxeo.com/free

_______________________________________________
Rucus mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rucus

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:09:27 -0700

> - Hannes Tschofenig about XMPP spam (and Hannes indicated he would

Hannes and I chatted about this in Minneapolis and I promised him that I
would write something up. Now just to figure out when I'll have time...

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/