Liaison statement
Liaison Statement to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 Regarding TIsec
Additional information about IETF liaison relationships is available on the
IETF webpage
and the
Internet Architecture Board liaison webpage.
| State | Posted |
|---|---|
| Submitted Date | 2012-12-11 |
| From Group | IETF |
| From Contact | Russ Housley |
| To Group | ISO-IEC-JTC1-SC6 |
| To Contacts | Dae Young KIM <dykim@cnu.kr> Jooran Lee <jooran@kisi.or.kr> |
| Cc | Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com> The IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org> The IESG <iesg@ietf.org> Bernard Aboba <Bernard_Aboba@hotmail.com> |
| Purpose | For comment |
| Deadline | 2013-06-30 Action Taken |
| Attachments | (None) |
| Liaisons referring to this one |
Liaison from the ISOC to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 and its National Body members in relation to ISO-IECJTC1-SC6_N15618
Liaison Response to ISOC on TIsec |
| Body |
Dear JTC1/SC6, Chairman Kim, and Secretary Lee,
We understand that there is a document filed for the agenda of the next
JTC1/SC6 meeting, in Seoul, by the National Body of China, discussing
TIsec. The most recent document that we have seen on this topic was
presented to the September 2012 Graz meeting, document number 6N15365
("NB of Chinas contribution on Further Research Report on TIsec").
We acknowledge that IANA received a request for a protocol number
assignment related to the TUE (TePA Universal Encapsulating) protocol,
which we understand is one part of TIsec. That request was denied with
this justification:
The IESG has reviewed the TUE (TePA Universal Encapsulating) protocol
number assignment request for a protocol number in the Internet
Protocol (IP) Protocols Number registry. We understand that the
request is motivated by the efforts to publish TUE in ISO/IEC
JTC1/SC6/WG7. The IESG is unwilling to assign a protocol number
until there is an approved document. An experimental value can be
used until the document is approved. However, without careful
analysis the protocol, for example, appears to provide the same
services as IPsec, and if that is the case, it would not be eligible
for a protocol number.
We notice a very strong similarity between IPsec and TIsec. The most
significant difference seems to be related to specific cryptographic
algorithms. IPsec is algorithm agile, so we suggest that a proper way
forward is to propose the use of TIsec cryptographic algorithms for use
with IPsec and have that processed in the normal manner within the
relevant IETF WG.
We gladly offer our assistance, if needed, for pursuing the cryptographic
algorithm registrations, and of course, we invite your open and active
participation towards this registration.
We would appreciate a response as to your interest in this course of
action.
With thanks for your consideration, and best regards,
On behalf of the IAB,
Bernard Aboba
On behalf of the IESG,
Russ Housley
|
