Thanks Joel, I've tried to summarize my line of thought below. There may be
other aspects I'm missing.
In traditional LISP, there is some shared state between a Map-Server and an ETR
in order to validate Map-Notifies. First, for integrity protection Map-Notifies
include some authentication data generated using a shared key between the
Map-Server and the ETR. Second, to protect against replay attacks the nonce
used in the Map-Register/Map-Notify exchange is incremented over time. This
requires that both the Map-Server and the ETR are in synch regarding the shared
key and incremental nonce.
PubSub introduces a new protocol operation where a Map-Server can send
Map-Notify messages to ITRs. This departs from the traditional ETR-MS
relationship stated above and introduces a few questions. How to keep a shared
key at scale between ITRs and a Map-Server? The ratio of ITRs-to-MS is
potentially orders of magnitude bigger than the ratio of ETRs-to-MS, are shared
keys even feasible? Besides, how to handle the nonce increment when the ITR is
also an ETR? Do we need to keep track of two Map-Notify nonces, one for the
Map-Register exchange and another for PubSub operation?
Thanks,
Alberto
On 3/16/20, 11:24 AM, "Joel Halpern Direct" <jmh.dir...@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
Thank you Alberto. To see if folks want to engage on the topic, could
you write a short email describing the question and, if you can, some of
the things that you would like to discuss?
Folks, let's be clear. I do expect we will have a virtual interim.
Maybe even more than one. I would really like to see groundwork on the
email list so that any request by the chairs for folks to make time is
for more than just some presentations.
Thank you,
Joel
On 3/16/2020 2:15 PM, Alberto Rodriguez Natal (natal) wrote:
> Joel, all,
>
> I'm in favor of having a virtual interim meeting. One of the points that
I have on my personal list of "things to discuss when we have time" is the
aspect of (unsolicited) Map-Notifies on PubSub. I think it can benefit from
some deeper discussion with the WG regarding, nonces, security associations,
ITR-MS relationship, etc. If the WG is up to it, I can bring the topic for
discussion and get some opinions on an interim.
>
> Thanks,
> Alberto
>
>
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
lisp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
