Subject: [sacm] Notes from Usage Scenario Walkthrough

From: "Adam W. Montville" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:59:00 -0400

All:

Several of us participated in a SACM usage scenario walkthrough yesterday evening.  During this time, we walked through each usage scenario from draft-ietf-sacm-use-cases-07 (sections 2.2.1 - 2.2.7).  Generally, we started out slow and rather talking past one another as we struggled with terms and understanding the domains for various ecosystem actors (i.e. what belongs to the Control Plane).  As the evening wore on, walking through the flows became easier, and we collected items for discussion with respect to the Architecture and the Information Model.

If anyone who was present feels I left something out, let me know or just make the correction on this thread.

Some assumptions/observations we believe to be true:

The “grid” is always on
There may be multiple grids for deployment (federated grids)
There may exist proxies at several locations in deployment (i.e. endpoint proxy, query proxy, etc.)
We need to handle asynchronous communications in different deployment scenarios (i.e. with/without proxy)

Things we know we need to do:

2.2.4 needs some rework with respect to clarifying how queries happen (i.e. query multiple data stores)
Define “baseline” in the terminology document
Define “guidance” in the terminology document

Things we believe we need to do:

Create an informational “flows” I-D

Things that need to be discussed:

Terminology updates: Checklist verification is different from endpoint verification
We may want to consider changing the name of “Automated Checklist Verification” (2.2.2)
Should there be two major sections in the Architecture draft? One for operational and the other for data exchange?  
Is observation of endpoint behavior in scope for this charter?  There was some discussion how this could go either way.  The in-room-consensus seemed to be that, while endpoint behavior may not be something we tackle now, we certainly do not want to preclude it as evidence of posture in the future.
Is security of transport sufficient or should we have some additional security functions for communications?
In disconnected environments, how do we queue messages and then batch them when the link is active?
Should the Control Plane be aware of data exchanges (i.e. for audit-ability, manageability)?

Regards,

Adam