Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 14:49:02 +0200

Hi Dirk,

NAT46 is not mentioned in the document because it not a scenario of high priority (please refer to behave WG charter for instance). 

Saying that, I don't think we need to be exhaustive in listing all NAT flavors there; what is important is to characterize the use case.

Cheers,
Med 

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Envoyé : mercredi 29 mai 2013 17:11
>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; int-
>[email-masked]
>Cc : [email-masked]
>Objet : RE: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios
>
>Hi Med, all,
>I see also the section 3.7 on femto cells with high security demands for
>tunneled (mobile) data via IPSec through the fixed network.
>
>Another question is whether to include also a scenario for NAT46 addressing
>IPv4 clients at end user nodes connected to both IPv6 RGW and IPv6 access
>network?  I think while many operators are starting to deploy IPv6 in their
>core and aggregation networks there will always be (maybe old fashioned)
>customers which continue to use their available equipment, e.g. for
>telephony.
>Perhaps this is already handled, e.g. in UC 3.6, but I couldn't find NAT46
>to be mentioned. Did I miss something?
>
>What do you think?
>Thanks!
>
>Best regards
>Dirk
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
>[email-masked]
>Sent: Dienstag, 7. Mai 2013 16:51
>To: 'Joshua Shire'; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
>Cc: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [fmc] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios
>
>Dear Joshua,
>
>Apologies for the delay to answer this message.
>
>I see your point. I will add it to the list of items to be considered for
>the next iteration of the document.
>
>BTW, -03 already included some of requirements which cover security aspects
>(see for instance REQ#1, REQ#2, REQ#3, REQ#9). Once we have a stable
>requirements list, we will identify the requirements which are valid for
>each use case: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-
>identifier-scenarios-03#section-4.1
>
>Cheers,
>Med
>
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : Joshua Shire [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>Envoyé : vendredi 25 janvier 2013 08:17
>>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
>>Cc : [email-masked]
>>Objet : RE: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios
>>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I do not believe a pointer to
>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analys
>>is-04#section-3  will be satisfactory for the security
>>considerations section.
>>
>>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3552.txt  states that when writing
>>a security considerations section, the process "...should be
>>approached as an effort to perform "due diligence" in
>>describing all known or foreseeable risks and threats to
>>potential implementers and users." Normally we see RFCs
>>describing more applied topics such as protocols, so the
>>specific language and examples given in the above mentioned
>>RFC may not seem directly applicable. However, "in spirit",
>>the document seems clear in requiring all RFCs to examine in
>>detail their potential security impact.
>>
>>As I'm sure we're all aware, some of the use cases identified
>>are purposefully implemented to maintain the confidentiality
>>of a client's identity (e.g. NAT to obfuscate the structure of
>>an enterprise network, Open-Wifi to conceal the identity of a
>>client under threat of persecution [or prosecution], etc.).
>>
>>Thus, in identifying these scenarios as sharing the "issue" of
>>host identification, the author would seem to be required to
>>discuss the potential security implications of treating the
>>lack of host identification as such, rather than a desirable feature.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Joshua Shire
>>Information Systems Manager
>>Hyduke Energy Services Inc.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: [email-masked]
>>[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
>>[email-masked]
>>Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 2:08 AM
>>To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
>>Cc: [email-masked]
>>Subject: [Int-area] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios
>>
>>Dear all,
>>
>>We submitted an updated version of this draft to list use
>>cases which encounter the issue of host identification. The
>>following use cases are discussed in the draft:
>>
>>   (1)  Carrier Grade NAT (CGN)
>>   (2)  A+P (e.g., MAP )
>>   (3)  Application Proxies
>>   (4)  Provider Wi-Fi
>>   (5)  Policy and Charging Architectures
>>   (6)  Cellular Networks
>>   (7)  Femtocells
>>   (8)  Overlay Networks (e.g., CDNs)
>>
>>The document does not include any solution-specific
>>discussion. Its main goal is to identify the use cases and
>>describe them.
>>
>>If you think your use case is not included in this version,
>>please share it with us.
>>
>>Comments are welcome.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Med
>>
>>
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : [email-masked]
>>[mailto:[email-masked]] De la part de
>>[email-masked] Envoyé : lundi 3 décembre 2012 08:26
>>À : [email-masked] Objet : I-D Action:
>>draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt
>>
>>
>>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line
>>Internet-Drafts directories.
>>
>>
>>	Title           : Host Identification: Use Cases
>>	Author(s)       : Mohamed Boucadair
>>                          David Binet
>>                          Sophie Durel
>>                          Tirumaleswar Reddy
>>                          Brandon Williams
>>	Filename        :
>>draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt
>>	Pages           : 14
>>	Date            : 2012-12-02
>>
>>Abstract:
>>   This document describes a set of scenarios in which host
>>   identification is required.
>>
>>
>>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-i
>>dentifier-scenarios
>>
>>There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identif
>>ier-scenarios-02
>>
>>A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-boucadair-intarea-host-i
>>dentifier-scenarios-02
>>
>>
>>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>I-D-Announce mailing list
>>[email-masked]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or
>>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>>_______________________________________________
>>Int-area mailing list
>>[email-masked]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>>
>_______________________________________________
>fmc mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fmc