Subject: [Anima] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-16: (with COMMENT)

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 05:40:00 -0700

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-16: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I haven't finished reading the whole document. I agree with Benjamin and Ekr
that some security aspects are underspecified.

A few extra comments/questions of my own:

1) Where is locator-option formally defined?

2)
6.10.2.  The ACP Addressing Base Scheme

   o  The 40 bits ULA "global ID" (term from [RFC4193]) for ACP
      addresses carried in the domain information field of domain
      certificates are the first 40 bits of the SHA256 hash of the
      routing subdomain from the same domain information field.

I think you need to make clear that one needs to canonicalize (e.g. to
lowercase) the routing subdomain before applying hash. You don't want some
nodes using "example.com" and other "EXAMPLE.com".

      In the
      example of Section 6.1.1, the routing subdomain is
      "area51.research.acp.example.com" and the 40 bits ULA "global ID"
      89b714f3db.

3) A.6:

   When Alice and Bob successfully establish the GRASP/TSL session, they

typo: TSL --> TLS

   will negotiate the channel mechanism to use using objectives such as
   performance and perceived quality of the security.  After agreeing on
   a channel mechanism, Alice and Bob start the selected Channel
   protocol.  Once the secure channel protocol is successfully running,
   the GRASP/TLS connection can be kept alive or timed out as long as
   the selected channel protocol has a secure association between Alice
   and Bob.  When it terminates, it needs to be re-negotiated via GRASP/
   TLS.

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 08:42:13 +1200

On 03/08/2018 00:40, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
...

> 1) Where is locator-option formally defined?

Good catch. That needs a reference to [I-D.ietf-anima-grasp].

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-anima-grasp-15#section-5

   Brian