IETF LAKE - Virtual Interim Thursday, January 16, 2020

Chairs: Mališa Vučinić, Stephen Farrell
Meeting link: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=ma39f9f8ea114844f79e2c962c6efdd52
Meeting number: 645 835 024
Password: C4j4PgDJ
Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/lake/about
Mailing list: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/Lake
Etherpad: https://etherpad.ietf.org/p/interim-2020-lake-01
Recording: https://ietf.webex.com/webappng/sites/ietf/recording/54ab302eeb1841a798f009dea27edc07

Note taker: Ivaylo Petrov

Present:
- Stephen Farrell
- Malisa Vucinic
- Francesca Palombini
- Ivaylo Petrov
- Sean Turner
- Michael Richardson (MCR)
- Göran Selander
- Marco Tiloca
- Rikard Hoglund
- John Mattsson
- Eric Rescorla (EKR)
- Klaus Hartke
- Simon Bouget
- Ira McDonald
- Karthik Bhargavan
- hvig
- Peter Blomqvist
- Kathleen Moriarty

Agenda:
- Administrivia and agenda bash (chairs, 5 mins)
- Requirements draft issues (Göran Selander, NN mins)
- Planning for IETF 107 and maybe beyond (chairs, 10 mins)
- AOB

Minutes:
- Administrivia and agenda bash (chairs, 5 mins)
   - No bashing of the agenda.
- Requirements draft issues (Göran Selander, NN mins)
    - Intro slides
         - Goran presenting issues (#1-10).   https://github.com/lake-wg/reqs/issues

    - Issue #1 Omit signature based protocol?
        - We can close the issue.
        - (MCR is still not sure, but is willing to take this 1:1)

    - Issue #2 Terminology of data chunks
        - EKR: Not only a terminology issue. 
        - MCR: Retransmissions can have security implications, which might not be aparent on the message exchange level.
        - EKR: There can be impacts based on where the fragmentation and defragmentation occurs.  Not sure I understand where the contraints are on whether the fragmentation occurs higher up or lower down.
        - Goran: We are assuming at least CoAP transport and not assuming much more.
        - MCR: tuning for different technology might be different, but security should not be affected
        - EKR: We should not make the tuning very bad for any particular technology.
        - MCR: We are trying to optimize radio units, not protocol messages.
        - MCR: AKE should be aware of fragmentation of lower levels, not do fragmentation.
        - ACTION: EKR: Takes action to re-read and propose a resolution for this issue or recommend we just close it (chairs to assign issue#2 to ekr so he can close if appropriate)
        - Flight vs messages - leave it for now and decide afterwards, most people are fine with both. We should just make sure it is clear that multiple "packets" can be transmitted simultaniously.
        - ACTION: Chairs - translate conclusions from here to github issues etc.

    - Issue #3 Resumption
        - ACTION: EKR to write some text - chair to assign him the issue.

    - Issue #4 Key separation
        - Maybe find a better term for "Application Data" (additional data or something else that implies it is part of the AKE)
        - ACTION: Goran to take the lead

    - Issue #5 PQC formulation
        - Leave the text as is and update only the extensions text.
        - ACTION: Close the issue.

    - Issue #6 Listing of specific attacks
        - Seems fine for people.
        - ACTION: Close

    - Issue #7 Extensibility vs. complexity
        - EKR: we should be able to not pay the cost of the things that we don't use (pay for what you use).
        - ACTION: MCR can take a look at it (to be assign by the chairs)

    - Issue #8 Strength of the handshake integrity check
    - Issue #9 AKE vs OSCORE properties
        - #8 and #9 were discussed together as they are very related.
        - EKR: Should be able to negotiate NULL cipher and make sure you get it.  I.e., the AKE needs to have integrity.
        - MCR: Heard that we do not want to truncate AKE authentication tag.
        - ACTION: Karthik to take the lead on this (chairs to assign the issue)

    - Issue #10 Negotiation of AKE mode
        - Proposal accepted: The AKE shall support negotiation of type of authentication credentials.  Need some text.
        - ACTION: Göran will take #10.

- Planning for IETF 107 and maybe beyond (chairs, 10 mins)
    - Way forward: WGLC and then park the draft once everyone is happy. What is next? 
    - EKR: I will have to think about it.
    - Goran: Discuss candidates.
    - No other suggestions so far.
    - Goran: Customers and partners are willing to start using, hence the willingness to start the discussion.

- Stephen: No need for the next timeslot.
- MCR: Hackathon?

- AOB