Subject: [karp] KARP Agenda at IETF 76

From: Brian Weis <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:12:52 -0700

Folks,

The draft agenda for the BoF has been posted: <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/agenda/karp.html 
 >.

Thanks,
Joel & Brian

---

From: "Gregory M. Lebovitz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:57:50 -0700

At 08:12 PM 10/26/2009, Brian Weis wrote:
>Folks,
>
>The draft agenda for the BoF has been posted: 
><http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/agenda/karp.html >.

Thanks a ton, Joel and Brian, for getting this out. Looks great. A 
few comments:

The current versions will be:
   draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-auth-opt-08
   draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-ao-crypto-01
  They should publish today or tomorrow.

I'd like to see the roadmap discussion (my part) broken down into 
it's more explanative piece parts, as these are the parts that a BoF 
really needs to discuss separately, and don't rightfully belong in 
one huge document as I have them today. Rather, they belong in 3 
different documents, I would think.
   - Goals / Overview - 5 min
    - Threat Model - 7 min
    - Requirements - 8 min
    - Framework - 10 min

Could we add this to the charter:
- Definition of the process of what work will be done in KARP vs in 
routing WG's and how the overlaps will be handled.  - 10 min

To get more time for this process discussion, I'd suggest the example 
preso of TCP-AO be shortened to 10 min. Justification: we don't need 
to teach on -AO, just quickly show how we got from MD5 to -AO as an 
example. Then we can take 5 min from the discussion at the end, to 
create a total of 10 min for the definition of process part.

Last, I'd like to see some of brief examples of work in progress on 
KARP-like topics from the community. Several of you have sent me 
things like these, from Vishwas:

1. 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-00.txt
is the draft I was talking about.
2. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5310 is the IS-IS RFC.
3. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-hmac-sha-03 is the
equivalent OSPF draft
4. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requirements-03
is the draft for Crypto requirements.

Would anyone like to give a 5 min preso on any of these things? Or 
any other related work?

Gregory.

>Thanks,
>Joel & Brian
>_______________________________________________
>karp mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/karp

---

From: Brian Weis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:15:33 -0700

Hi Gregory,

> They should publish today or tomorrow.

Thanks.

>  - Goals / Overview - 5 min

Will do.

> routing WG's and how the overlaps will be handled.  - 10 min

My expectation is that this will be naturally covered during the  
Charter Discussion and Open Discussion, as there are likely to be many  
opinions. I don't think 10 minutes would be long enough, but I'll  
confer with Joel on this request.

> To get more time for this process discussion, I'd suggest the  
> example preso of TCP-AO be shortened to 10 min. Justification: we  
> don't need to teach on -AO, just quickly show how we got from MD5 to  
> -AO as an example. Then we can take 5 min from the discussion at the  
> end, to create a total of 10 min for the definition of process part.
>
> 1. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-00.txt

There are actually more protocol documents available, and I don't  
think we'd have time to discuss them all in detail. It's my plan to  
cover them all lightly during the Survey agenda item. Does that sound  
reasonable to you?

Thanks,
Brian

-- 
Brian Weis
Router/Switch Security Group, ARTG, Cisco Systems
Telephone: +1 408 526 4796
Email: [email-masked]

---

From: "Gregory M. Lebovitz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:28:30 -0700

>>At 08:12 PM 10/26/2009, Brian Weis wrote:

--snip--

>confer with Joel on this request.

Either way is fine; I just want to ensure we address this issue 
explicitly, because people keep bringing it up.

>cover them all lightly during the Survey agenda item. Does that sound

Sure. I think we are trying to achieve the same thing here, which is 
to draw together all the different efforts going on all over the rtg 
and security areas, show that there is indeed a lot of interest and 
work in progress, and get them all going in somewhat the same 
direction. I think having one other presentation other than TCP-AO 
would be good, as an example. The work on multicast protocols or the 
OSPF would be good, because they share many similar issues. But I'm 
fine either way. Your call.

Gregory.

---

From: Manav Bhatia <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:47:27 +0530

Hi Gregory,

> Last, I'd like to see some of brief examples
> of work in progress on KARP-like topics from
> the community. Several of you have sent me things
> like these, from Vishwas:
>

This draft was updated based on the feedback that we received in OPSEC
and the new revision can be found here:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsec-routing-protocols-crypto-issues-01

There are issues with the formatting which will be fixed in the next revision.

> 3. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-hmac-sha-03 is the

This is RFC 5709 now.

> is the draft for Crypto requirements.

There is one for BFD too -
http://www.potaroo.net/ietf/all-ids/draft-bhatia-bfd-crypto-auth-00.txt

I will be posting the revised and the updated ID after this IETF once
draft submission reopens.

Cheers, Manav