On 03/10/2014 04:12, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie>
> wrote:
> 
>>
>> On 02/10/14 13:49, Michael Behringer (mbehring) wrote:
>>> My personal goal is that what we do in ANIMA is fully compatible with
>>> and ideally used in homenet. It would feel wrong to me to have an
>>> infrastructure that doesn't work in a homenet.
>>>
>>> The security bootstrap is a good example of what we can achieve, with
>>> reasonable effort.
>> FWIW, it is not clear to me that the reasonable requirements
>> for provisioning device security information (or bootstrapping
>> if we wanted to call it that) are the same.
>>
> 
> This is where we would have overlap with SACM and I2NSF.  I've spoken in
> Ops and Dan R has helped to try to recruit some folks to help in SACM.  It
> would be good to not solve this in multiple places.  SACM and I2NSF are
> de-conflicting what they cover.  Provisioning and assessing security
> information is part of those efforts already, hence my questions on the
> charter as well.
> 
>> In enterprise environments we see fewer larger vendors of devices.
>> In the home where we additionally have a large range of vendors
>> many of whom are tiny and leverage a lot of OSS and who could
>> perhaps not take part in the kind of provisioning infrastructure
>> that is quite reasonable for enterprises and their vendors.
>>
> 
> There is a push in the vendor space for this type of automation and I'm all
> for it, let's just coordinate on it so we don't wind up with too many ways
> to do it.

Absolutely. It isn't surprising that Anima proponents are proposing
specific approaches to security (or anything else), but there is an
overriding sentence in the charter:

"Where suitable protocols, models or methods exist, they will be preferred over
creating new ones. "

Clerarly that calls for coordination and awareness.

   Brian

> 
> 
>> I do think both want to end up in the same state, where devices
>> are authorised for connection to the network and where there is
>> some keying material usable for security, but I'd be surprised
>> if one approach to getting there worked the same way for both
>> homes and enterprises.
>>
> 
> I'd like to see this discusses more, but maybe it's not in this group?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kathleen
> 
>> S.
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> an...@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to