Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-jjmb-httpbis-trusted-traffic-00.txt

From: Patrick McManus <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 15:10:01 +0000 (UTC)

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Brzozowski, John Jason <[email-masked]>
wrote:

>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
>
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-jjmb-httpbis-trusted-
> traffic-00.txt
>
>
>
>     Name:               draft-jjmb-httpbis-trusted-traffic
>
>     Revision: 00
>
>     Title:                 Trusted Traffic
>
>     Document date:  2018-05-22
>
>     Group:               Individual Submission
>
>     Pages:               12
>
>     URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-
> drafts/draft-jjmb-httpbis-trusted-traffic-00.txt
>
>     Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jjmb-httpbis-
> trusted-traffic/
>
>     Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/
> draft-jjmb-httpbis-trusted-traffic-00
>
>     Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/
> doc/html/draft-jjmb-httpbis-trusted-traffic
>
>
>
>
>
>     Abstract:
>
>        Current methods for managing traffic through content inspection
> tend
>
>        to process all sessions similarly.  Internet traffic examples like
>
>        DDoS mitigation require all data to pass through one of a limited
>
>        number of scrubbing centers, which create both natural choke points
>
>        and the potential for widespread collateral damage should a center
>
>        become overloaded.  Similar issues exist with email SPAM and
> malware
>
>        filtering, traffic shaping, etc.
>

[..]

as the authors were kind enough to write up an individual draft and flag
httpbis with it during submission, I wanted to ask a follow question to the
non-authors on the list and find out if there is currently energy and/or
interest in addressing the use case it describes within our group. (please
separate that question from any concerns/enthusiasms about the proposed
solution). Thanks.

-Patrick