Subject: Re: Scope questions was RE: [Ieprep] a little homily - benefits o f mu lticast

From: Ken Carlberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 20:25:41 +0100

> From: "Rosen, Brian" <[email-masked]>
>
> It would be interesting, for example, to be able to authenticate as an 
> emergency request, and have a firewall alter its policies for you. 

ahhh, a nice lead in to the fun world of security....

...at this time i'd like to ask (plead :-) if folks could take a look at
<http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brown-ieps-sec-00.txt>
and provide some feedback.  admittedly, the draft is aimed at complimenting
the Framework document, but we'd be very interested to get some comments
from others -- is something missing?, is something broken?,is the draft
on track and reasonable?, etc.  

I believe Fred has expressed an interest in making the draft a working 
group item, but there is a strong desire to get some feedback on the 
list about it as well.

thanks,

-ken

_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep

---

From: "Rosen, Brian" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 14:07:29 -0500

You always get to use a spec if you want to; there are no protocol police
that limit you to whatever a "applicability statement" says.  It isn't clear
to me
how a totally isolated network would be of much use in an emergency, but you
never know.  A more likely event is that you have a private network BEHIND A
FIREWALL
connected to the public network.  In an emergency, you would like to be able
to
jack in to that net and get communications established across the big-I
Internet.
That has several interesting implications, and I think is well in scope.
It would be interesting, for example, to be able to authenticate as an
emergency
request, and have a firewall alter its policies for you.  It would of course
be
up to local administration to decide what such policies might be, but it
sure
would be interesting to have a spec that defined the authentication
mechanism,
and perhaps a recommendation on appropriate policies.
 
For example - when you come to an IETF meeting, you will find that you can
easily establish a VPN tunnel back to your "home" network.  You will also
find
that the same thing won't work behind many corporate firewalls.  Opening
the port that allowed the VPN could be conditional on some sort of
authentication
mechanism, which would allow it to work for an emergency.
 
Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: Gunn, Janet NE [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 1:55 PM
To: 'Fred Baker'; Alistair Munro
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Scope questions was RE: [Ieprep] a little homily - benefits of mu
lticast

Something is not clear to me from the charter.  Is the scope of this group
restricted to the "public" or "core" Internet, or does it include
entrerprize based "private" IP based networks?

Janet 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Fred Baker [ mailto:[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> ] 
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 12:55 PM 
At 05:52 AM 4/4/2002, Alistair Munro wrote: 
>I can't quite parse this, so excuse any misunderstanding. There are 
>conferencing 
>applications based on multicast that I have used, and I am sure that you
have 
>too. On the non-interactive side, there is content being distributed from 
>Internet2 sites using multicast - albeit experimental. Microsoft media
server 
>distributes content using multicast. 

yes, and those are used in some enterprise environments. Scott is pointing 
out that there isn't much of this on the backbone. We know that there 
isn't, because few of the backbone operators enable multicast routing. They 
have had trouble with it and because they have not been able to obtain 
revenue from it, so the capability simply doesn't exist in their networks. 
Intersite multicast across the Internet mostly happens in tunnels. 

_______________________________________________ 
Ieprep mailing list 
[email-masked] 
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep
<https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 12:21:54 -0800

><http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brown-ieps-sec-00.txt>

for the record, that is about to expire if it has not already, as it was 
posted last July and drafts have a six month lifetime. Hence, in February, 
I took the liberty of reposting it as 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-brown-ieprep-sec-00.txt