Also note that RFC 3924 exists.
On Jul 31, 2012, at 4:14 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Loa,
I can't speak for Scott, but I think the problem arises if any
IANA assignments are needed, regardless of RFC status. That's
because RFC 2804 speaks of "the process for creating and maintaining
IETF standards." IANA assignments are part of standards maintenance
(IMHO, of course).
Don't forget that 2804 *also* says
" - On the other hand, the IETF believes that mechanisms designed to
facilitate or enable wiretapping, or methods of using other
facilities for such purposes, should be openly described, so as to
ensure the maximum review of the mechanisms and ensure that they
adhere as closely as possible to their design constraints. The IETF
believes that the publication of such mechanisms, and the
publication of known weaknesses in such mechanisms, is a Good
Thing."
So it's a delicate balance.
Brian
On 31/07/2012 11:40, Loa Andersson wrote:
Scott,
would you say that drafts aimed for experimental status are "standards
work".
/Loa
On 2012-07-30 18:33, Scott O Bradner wrote:
2804 does not say not to talk about such things - or that such
documents should
not be published as RFCs - 2804 says that the IETF will not do
standards work
in this area
Scott
On Jul 30, 2012, at 5:04 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Under the long-standing IETF policy defined in RFC 2804, I trust
we will not be discussing this draft, or
draft-balaji-l2vpn-lawful-intercept-thru-label-dis, in the IETF.
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 30/07/2012 09:26, internet-drafts(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org wrote:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : Label-based Provider-Provisioned Lawful
Intercept for L3 VPNs
Author(s) : Shankar Raman
Balaji Venkat Venkataswami
Gaurav Raina
Vasan Srini
Bhargav Bhikkaji
Filename :
draft-balaji-mpls-lawful-intercept-thru-label-dis-00.txt
Pages : 12
Date : 2012-07-30
Abstract:
In models of Single-AS and inter-provider Multi- Protocol Label
Switching (MPLS) based Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) Lawful
Intercept is a key requirement. For example, MPLS-based Layer 3 VPN
models like VPLS and the like do not have any provider provisioned
methods of lawful intercept that are comprehensive, quick and
easy to
provision from one single point. More particularly the auto-
provisioning of lawful intercept for all sets of streams travelling
between VPN sites and consequent re-direction of these streams to
the
appropriate government network has not been covered without multiple
instances of having to configure the intercept at various points in
the network both in the Single-AS case and the Inter-Provider VPN
case.
this paper, we propose a technique which uses a set of pre-defined
labels called Lawful Intercept labels and a method for provisioning
lawful intercept amongst the various PE devices using these labels
both in the Single-AS and the inter-provider VPN cases. A single
point of configuration is the key to this idea. The intercepted
traffic is mirrored on a PE or a whole set of PEs or on all the PEs
participating in the VPN. A technique called the Domino-effect
provisioning of these Label-based Provider Provisioned Lawful
Intercept mechanism is also outlined.
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-balaji-mpls-lawful-intercept-thru-label-dis
There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-balaji-mpls-lawful-intercept-thru-label-dis-00
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
I-D-Announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
--Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb