Minutes interim-2016-dots-02: Tue 10:00
minutes-interim-2016-dots-02-201609271000-00

Meeting Minutes DDoS Open Threat Signaling (dots) WG
Title Minutes interim-2016-dots-02: Tue 10:00
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2016-10-05

Meeting Minutes
minutes-interim-2016-dots-02-201609271000

   DDoS Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) WG
Virtual Interim Meeting Minutes

Tuesday, September 27, 2016
1400-1530 UTC

1. Note well, logistics and introduction
========================================
Presenters: Roman Danyliw, Tobias Gondrom
Slides:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim-2016-dots-02/slides/slides-interim-2016-dots-02-201609271000-chairs-slides-02.pdf

The chairs presented a summary of the working group's activities.

Approximately 18 participants were online through-out the virtual interim
meeting.

Comment: (Andrew Mortensen) The architecture draft is missing a milestone

Q (Roman Danyliw): Does the WG have any concern about meeting the existing
milestones? A (Flemming Andreasen): No.

2. Use Case Discussion
======================

Use Case draft
---------------
Presenters: Roland Dobbins
Slides: none
Draft: draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-02 (unpublished)

Dobbins summarized progress on producing the -02 draft.

Q (Roman Danyliw): When will a new use cases draft be ready?
A (Roland Dobbins): -02 should be published by Friday, October 7.
A (Flemming Andreasen): The sooner the document could be reviewed, the better.

Dobbins and Migault discussed progress on consolidating the current three use

Additional Use Cases
--------------------
Presenter: Kaname Nishizuk
Slides:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim-2016-dots-02/slides/slides-interim-2016-dots-02-201609271000-inter-domain-dots-usecases-draft-nishizuka-dots-inter-domain-usecases-02-00.pdf
Draft: draft-nishizuka-dots-inter-domain-usecases-02

(Note during that during the interim meeting, this presentation occurred after
Item #3, data and information models)

Nishizuk discussed updates to additional use cases.

Comment (Bob Moskowitz): Don't introduce another client-id into the data model.

3. Data and Information Model(s) Discussion
===========================================

Information and Data Model
--------------------------
Presenter: Flemming Andreasen
Slides: none
Draft: draft-andreasen-dots-info-data-model-00

Flemming introduced the working group to a new information and data model draft.

Q (Flemming Andreasen): Any early feedback on the structure?
A (Andrew Mortensen): It looks good.
A (Tobias Gondrom): It looks good.

Comment (Andrew Mortensen): All status information should be bundled together.

Comment (Roland Dobbins): Agree with approach to loosely couple signal and data
channel.

Comment (Andrew Mortensen): It appears that anycast is being incorporated in
the architecture.  This might make the ability to redirect message less
dependent on the network Comment (Roland Dobbins): Redirection is a best
operational practice but should not be a mandatory requirement/

Comment (Tiru Reddy): What's the role of the lower level protocol in
authentication?

Q (Daniel Migault): Is there a Yang model coming?
A (Flemming Andreasen): At this point, this draft is staying less formal
A (Bob Moskowitz): I2NSF has adopted Yang

4. Protocol drafts
==================

Data Channel
------------
Presenter: Tiru Reddy
Slides:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim-2016-dots-02/slides/slides-interim-2016-dots-02-201609271000-dots-data-channel-draft-reddy-dots-data-channel-00-00.pdf
Draft: draft-reddy-dots-data-channel-00

Reddy introduced a new data channel draft.

Comment (Roland Dobbins): White and black lists will introduce complexity.

Comment (Roland Dobbins): Telemetry is another area that is above and beyond
what is needed for "minimal viability". Comment (Flemming Andreasen): We'll
have to discuss what is the "minimal viable" vs. what is an extension

Comment (Andrew Mortensen): Since both the data and signal channel are using
CoAP, why split them into separate channels? Comment (Flemming Andreasen): Is
there a need for a separate data and signal channel using the same transport?

Comment (Andrew Mortensen): Using REST, a well-known approach, for the data
channel is help with adoption.

Signal Channel
--------------
Presenter: Prashanth Patil
Slides:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim-2016-dots-02/slides/slides-interim-2016-dots-02-201609271000-dots-signal-channel-draft-reddy-dots-signal-channel-00-00.pdf
Draft: draft-reddy-dots-signal-channel-00

Patil introduced a new signal channel draft.

Comment (Andrew Mortensen): Why is DTLS appropriate for the signal channel
given the need for a heartbeat?

5. Open discussion and additional business
==========================================

There was no new business.

Comment (Nik Teague): Using JSON appears to have fallen out of favor.  Do we
want an alternative? Comment (Prashanth Patil): Good point.  Maybe CBOR should
be explored.  More discussion is required.

Roland Dobbins provided an Arbor Networks perspective on recent DDOS activities
in the news (e.g., Krebs)

Q (Tobias Gondrom): Who else should we be trying to attract to the WG?
A (Roland Dobbins): Akamai

6. Closing discussion and way ahead summary
===========================================

Comment (Roman Danyliw): Please watch the mailing list for the schedule of
design team meetings during IETF 97.