Subject: [Hipsec-rg] I-D ACTION:draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.txt
From: [email-masked] (Papadoglou, Nick, VF-Group)
Date: Sun Oct 30 13:10:01 2005

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5DD7D.181DB72A
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 Dear all,

Please find below a new ID that we submitted and we intent to
present/discuss in the Vancouver meeting. Your comments/suggestions and
constructive comments are more than welcome.=20

Best regards,

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 12:50 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.txt=20

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

	Title		: Host Identity Tags (HIT) in Presence
Information Data Format (PIDF)=20
	Author(s)	: N. Papadoglou, H. Zisimopoulos
	Filename	: draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.txt
	Pages		: 11
	Date		: 2005-10-18
=09
   This document describes a new way of exchanging Host Identities (or=20
   Host Identity Tags) by means of the Presence Information Data Format=20
   [6]  using the Host Identity Protocol (HIP). A new presence=20
   information element is proposed as an extension to the Presence=20
   Information Data Format (PIDF), to include and convey the Host=20
   Identity that corresponds to the different SIP URI's the node may=20
   have registered. This automatically creates a list of associations=20
   between the SIP URI and the Host identity for the different UA=20
   instances on the same or different node.=20
    =20

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-
00.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to
[email-masked] with the word unsubscribe in the body of
the message. =20
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the
username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After
logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE
/internet-drafts/draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.txt".
=09
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail
readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.
	=09
	=09
Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5DD7D.181DB72A
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.URL"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Description: draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.URL
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="draft-papadoglou-hiprg-hit-presence-00.URL"

W0ludGVybmV0U2hvcnRjdXRdDQpVUkw9ZnRwOi8vZnRwLmlldGYub3JnL2ludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0
cy9kcmFmdC1wYXBhZG9nbG91LWhpcHJnLWhpdC1wcmVzZW5jZS0wMC50eHQNCg==

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5DD7D.181DB72A--

From: [email-masked] (Henderson, Thomas R)
Date: Thu Oct 13 12:16:00 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] meeting timeslot set
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

HIP RG will meet on Friday Nov. 11 in Vancouver at 12:30-15:00.  There
is some discussion of allowing multiple RGs to start meeting in this
timeslot (i.e., make Friday afternoon the IRTF timeslot in general), but
for now, only our meeting is scheduled there.

Tom

From: [email-masked] (Pekka Nikander)
Date: Mon Oct 10 03:46:01 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] Re: Routable IP addresses as LSIs
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

>> I am starting to think that we probably should start pushing  
>> routable IP addresses as LSIs, together with opportunistic HIP,  
>> for certain uses.  [...]  We might want to call this "invisible  
>> HIP", as whether there is HIP underneath or not is invisible to  
>> applications.
>
> I think that such an "invisible" implementation could potentially be
> quite flexible, with more features than our current implementation
> provides [...]
>
>> I am planning to take this up during the shim6 interim in
>> Amsterdam,[...]
>
> Thanks for the note-- please let us know how the discussion goes  
> there.

I took this up, very briefly, but it didn't generate any discussion.

However, what happened was that Erik Nordmark adopted the HIP packet  
format for his SHIM6 protocol proposal, with some minimal changes to  
the format.  See my separate message at the HIP WG mailing list.

We also agreed that Marcelo and I will write a draft (in Jan/Feb time  
frame) giving guidelines for SHIM6 extensions.

In general, I think that people would be very receptive for HIP/SHIM6  
hybrids for various _research_ purposes.  I'd encourage people to  
read draft-ietf-shim6-proto-01.txt once it is out.  You can also read  
-00, but as I mentioned above the packet and option formats were  
changed in order to be coincidentally compatible with HIP.

--Pekka

From: [email-masked] (Henderson, Thomas R)
Date: Fri Oct  7 11:56:01 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] RE: Routable IP addresses as LSIs
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pekka Nikander [mailto:[email-masked]]=20
> Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 1:55 AM
> To: Henderson, Thomas R
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Routable IP addresses as LSIs
>=20
> Tom,
>=20
> > 3.   draft-henderson-hip-applications-01.txt
> >
> > Pekka suggested that this is soon ready for individual submission=20
> > (Informational).  Please email the list with your comments,=20
> even if it=20
> > is to say "I read the draft and have no comments."
>=20
> I am starting to think that we probably should start pushing=20
> routable IP addresses as LSIs, together with opportunistic=20
> HIP, for certain uses.  In other words, our work on this=20
> draft has finally been able to change my mind on this. :-) =20
> We might want to call this "invisible HIP", as whether there=20
> is HIP underneath or not is invisible to applications.
>=20

I think that such an "invisible" implementation could potentially be
quite flexible, with more features than our current implementation
provides (our kernel-mode Linux implementation is built this way, while
the Windows implementation uses non-routable LSIs). =20

The configuration can be performed by extension of the IPsec SPD and
related tools (e.g., setkey) and the applications do not have to change
or deal with non-routable LSIs.  For instance, rules could be based on
IP addresses or HITs, and HIP could either run opportunistically or
require that the HIT records match the IP addresses as fetched from DNS.
Also, there could be a few policy options for behavior such as requiring
HIP to allow communications to proceed, or just trying to use HIP if the
peer supports but allowing fallback to normal TCP/IP.  There is also a
possible tie-in to the OCALA overlay architecture that does not
necessarily require non-routable LSIs.

> I am planning to take this up during the shim6 interim in=20
> Amsterdam, tomorrow and on Sunday, with the goal of shim6 and=20
> this "invisible HIP" being semantically compatible with each=20
> other.  I'm afraid that the actual HIP base exchange protocol=20
> is still far too heavy for shim6, but I am hoping that we=20
> could share much of the path status maintenance and packet=20
> transport mechanisms for non-ESP case.
>=20

Thanks for the note-- please let us know how the discussion goes there.

Tom

From: [email-masked] (Alfredo Matos)
Date: Fri Oct  7 05:16:01 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] draft status
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

Henderson, Thomas R wrote:

>
>8.   draft-matos-hip-privacy-extensions-00 
>
>This draft was new at the last meeting, and again, feedback is
>requested.
>
We are currently undergoing some work on a -01 version and studying the
feasibility of an experimental implementation at this point in time. But
nevertheless, feedback would be greatly appreciated for what needs
reviewing in the -01.

Alfredo Matos

From: [email-masked] (Lars Eggert)
Date: Fri Oct  7 04:56:01 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] draft status
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

--Apple-Mail-24-44931321
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=US-ASCII;
	delsp=yes;
	format=flowed

On Oct 7, 2005, at 11:00, Pekka Nikander wrote:
>> 10.       draft-nikander-hip-path-00.txt
>>
>> This draft has expired and needs updating, since there is some  
>> ongoing
>> work in this area (HIP over UDP).
>
> I agree, but unfortunately I don't have any cycles for this at this  
> point of time.  I think this is a candidate for a WG item at re- 
> chartering.

Once it's updated. It needs some serious work IMO.

Lars
--
Lars Eggert                                     NEC Network Laboratories

--Apple-Mail-24-44931321
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature;
	name=smime.p7s
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=smime.p7s

--Apple-Mail-24-44931321--

From: [email-masked] (Pekka Nikander)
Date: Fri Oct  7 04:51:00 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] draft status
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

> 9.   draft-nikander-esp-beet-mode-03.txt
>
> I do not know the status of this.  It has been discussed also in =20
> mobike.

People are working on clean implementations for both BSD and Linux.  =20
I think it is important to keep this draft alive; I wouldn't be that =20
worried about getting it into an RFC at this point of time.  We can =20
easily live in draft format until the interface stabilises, we get =20
some experience, and the code gets adopted by either BSD or Linux, if =20=

not both.

> 10.       draft-nikander-hip-path-00.txt
>
> This draft has expired and needs updating, since there is some ongoing
> work in this area (HIP over UDP).

I agree, but unfortunately I don't have any cycles for this at this =20
point of time.  I think this is a candidate for a WG item at re-=20
chartering.

> 11.    draft-nikander-hiprg-hi3-00.txt
>
> This draft was presented for informational purposes and I do not know
> the authors' intent for the future of this draft.

We don't intend to work on this.  Consider the draft dead.  More or =20
less the same information has been published at two places:

Andrei Gurtov, Dmitry Korzun, Pekka Nikander, "Hi3: An Efficient and =20
Secure Networking Architecture for Mobile Hosts," Technical report =20
2005-2, Helsinki Institute for Information Technology, June 2005.
http://www.tml.tkk.fi/~pnr/publications/HIIT_gurtov_hi3_report_2005.pdf

Pekka Nikander, Jari Arkko, and B=F6rje Ohlman, "Host Identity =20
Indirection Infrastructure (Hi3)," in Proceedings of The Second =20
Swedish National Computer Networking Workshop 2004 (SNCNW2004), =20
Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden, Nov 23-24, 2004.
http://www.tml.tkk.fi/~pnr/publications/sncnw2004.pdf

--Pekka

From: [email-masked] (Pekka Nikander)
Date: Fri Oct  7 04:45:01 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] Routable IP addresses as LSIs
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

Tom,

> 3.   draft-henderson-hip-applications-01.txt
>
> Pekka suggested that this is soon ready for individual submission
> (Informational).  Please email the list with your comments, even if it
> is to say "I read the draft and have no comments."

I am starting to think that we probably should start pushing routable  
IP addresses as LSIs, together with opportunistic HIP, for certain  
uses.  In other words, our work on this draft has finally been able  
to change my mind on this. :-)  We might want to call this "invisible  
HIP", as whether there is HIP underneath or not is invisible to  
applications.

I am planning to take this up during the shim6 interim in Amsterdam,  
tomorrow and on Sunday, with the goal of shim6 and this "invisible  
HIP" being semantically compatible with each other.  I'm afraid that  
the actual HIP base exchange protocol is still far too heavy for  
shim6, but I am hoping that we could share much of the path status  
maintenance and packet transport mechanisms for non-ESP case.

--Pekka

From: [email-masked] (Tschofenig, Hannes)
Date: Fri Oct  7 03:53:01 2005
Subject: AW: [Hipsec-rg] draft status
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

hi tom,=20

~snip~=20

> 5.    draft-tschofenig-hiprg-hip-natfw-traversal-02.txt
>=20
> The authors are inviting comments on this draft (again, even=20
> if you read
> and have no comments, please provide feedback).

based on the received feedback we turned this document more and more
into a problem statement and requirements document for the traversal of
HIP >>>AWARE<<< NATs/Firewalls. this is the difference compared to
martin's document where he discusses the traversal of HIP >>>UNAWARE<<<
NATS/Firewalls.=20

we will ship another draft update and would therefore like to see some
feedback particularly since this document is out there already for some
time. =20
=20
>=20
> 6/7.   draft-tschofenig-hiprg-hip-srtp-00.txt
>        draft-tschofenig-hiprg-host-identities-02.txt=20
>=20
> These drafts are still in work, according to Gonzalo's comments at the
> Paris meeting.

it is true that these documents are work in progress. we will ship a
draft update for the next ietf.=20
i personally would like to see some feedback what people think about the
draft-tschofenig-hiprg-host-identities-02.txt since it discusses an
important point: what is the interaction with sip and hip?

ciao
hannes

From: [email-masked] (Henderson, Thomas R)
Date: Fri Oct  7 01:59:01 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] draft status
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

We have a number of drafts in this RG.  Below I will summarize the
status of various drafts.  The overall IRTF process is found in RFC
2014.

Many drafts expire over time, but some live on in various forms.  One
path forward, which may apply to drafts in our RG, is for the draft to
transition into an IETF WG if such WG takes the draft as part of their
charter.  Another possibility is for drafts to be published as
informational RFCs as individual submissions to the RFC editor.  In that
case, they would start at the top of the process shown in the below
figure:
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc-editor/rfc-editor-process.gif

We can take on drafts as "draft-irtf" documents if the RG agrees to this
approach.  Typically, this would be the case if the draft were an
explicit charter item of the RG, or if there was a draft that received
significant interest and discussion/revision by the RG.  In such a case,
the draft may bear a note such as:
"   This document was produced by members of the IRTF's HIP Research
Group (HIPRG)."
although it doesn't significantly change the approval path of the
document.

We discussed 12 drafts in Paris.  Here is my understanding of the status
of the various drafts.

1.  draft-irtf-hip-experiment-01.txt=20

Some new material on this draft was reviewed.  Andrei requested inputs
from people who had additional experimental experience.

2.  draft-boeing-hiprg-opendht-00.txt

no action needed at this stage, other than comments-- still in early
form

3.   draft-henderson-hip-applications-01.txt=20

Pekka suggested that this is soon ready for individual submission
(Informational).  Please email the list with your comments, even if it
is to say "I read the draft and have no comments."

4.   draft-stiemerling-hip-nat-05.txt=20

As we have agreed at the meeting and on the list some time ago, we are
going to take this problem statement on NAT/firewall traversal as a
draft-irtf document.  Martin is submitting it before the deadline.

5.    draft-tschofenig-hiprg-hip-natfw-traversal-02.txt

The authors are inviting comments on this draft (again, even if you read
and have no comments, please provide feedback).

6/7.   draft-tschofenig-hiprg-hip-srtp-00.txt
       draft-tschofenig-hiprg-host-identities-02.txt=20

These drafts are still in work, according to Gonzalo's comments at the
Paris meeting.

8.   draft-matos-hip-privacy-extensions-00=20

This draft was new at the last meeting, and again, feedback is
requested.

9.   draft-nikander-esp-beet-mode-03.txt

I do not know the status of this.  It has been discussed also in mobike.

10.       draft-nikander-hip-path-00.txt=20

This draft has expired and needs updating, since there is some ongoing
work in this area (HIP over UDP).
=20
11.    draft-nikander-hiprg-hi3-00.txt=20

This draft was presented for informational purposes and I do not know
the authors' intent for the future of this draft.

12.    draft-mkomu-hip-native-api-00.txt=20

Again, the authors seek feedback on the list.

From: [email-masked] (Henderson, Thomas R)
Date: Thu Oct  6 12:05:00 2005
Subject: [Hipsec-rg] meeting slot and agenda requests
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

It may be some time still until a draft agenda is published.  For your
planning purposes, we have requested a Friday PM (12:30 to 3PM) slot,
with alternate of Friday AM.  I suspect that we will again receive the
Friday PM slot, which was not available in Paris.

Please send me your agenda requests between now and October 21.

Thanks,
Tom