Brian, is it your contention that 802.11 is beyond the scope of autonomic computing?
On 14.07.18 01:34, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 13/07/2018 21:26, Owen Friel (ofriel) wrote: >> I think its more accurate to state: >> >> “What a CUSTOMER wants to avoid is a pledge joining a network where the MASA >> just does the logging and does no validation, without any other means to >> determine that the device is on the correct network.” E.g. I plug in a wi-fi >> device and it connects to the SSID of the company on the floor below me. > That is so far outside the scope of the autonomic networking infrastructure > application of BRSKI that I don't see why we'd even mention it. It's a case > that definitely needs to fail hard in the autonomic context. > > If we want to extend the scope of BRSKI to cover BYOD on insecure WiFi, I > think that's for some other WG. > > Brian > >> The MASA cannot help with this unless there is complex sales channel >> integration and the MASA explicitly knows in advance exactly what network >> each pledge will be connecting to. A potential option is to also require the >> registrar to provide some proof of ownership to the MASA in the >> VoucherRequest. >> >> From: Anima <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Eliot Lear >> Sent: Thursday 12 July 2018 17:38 >> To: Michael Richardson <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Anima] Revision of scope of MASA in the BRSKI - Reg >> >> >> The problem is that the manufacturer doesn't have enough context to make >> decisions as to which network to join. That is the challenge. >> >> On 12.07.18 17:12, Michael Richardson wrote: >> >> >> >> Eliot Lear <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > involved. What a manufacturer wants to avoid is a pledge joining a >> >> > network where the MASA just does the logging and does no validation, >> >> > without any other means to determine that the device is on the >> >> > correct network. Otherwise, the pledge (we could call it the >> >> > "station" in this context) could simply home to the wrong network, >> >> > and even resetting the device won't get you to the right network. >> >> >> >> I don't understand how the "manufacturer" can have a desire ("the pledge >> >> avoid joining a network ...") that is different from the MASA's desire. >> >> >> >> The MASA *is* the expression manufacturer's desire. >> >> If the manufacturer has sales channel information that indicates the Pledge >> >> is on the wrong network, it should not issue a voucher. >> >> >> >> So the situation you describe makes no sense to me. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Anima mailing list >> >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Anima mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima >> > _______________________________________________ > Anima mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
