Re: [1904-ANWG] Slides used for discussion last night

[Marek Hajduczenia <mxhaj79@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Glen,

Some thoughts / feedback

• I do not see much value in supporting 128b keys if 256b keys seem to be the new norm. Given both supported, I would default to 256b key anyway, because why not. Unless there is some substantial pro of still doing 128b keys, I am not sure what it buys us, really.
  
• I see value in allowing ONU to operate with the disabled encryption - there will be T/S cases where encryption will need to come down to be able to capture traffic in plain text. Encryption should be enabled by default, though, if that makes any sense.
  
• An explicit enable/disable message makes sense to me, especially since it is relatively low implementation cost and allows for more interoperable behavior between different implementations. The ONU should still use default enabled encryption, to avoid most misconfiguration problems (someone forgets to enable it, etc.)
• I am not sure I see much use for the mix of encrypted / unencrypted envelopes, unless we see much use case for transmitting multicast / broadcast accessible to all users. I am wondering, though, whether such partial encryption has any advantages. If I wanted to T/S link, I would just disable the encryption for the ONU altogether.
  
• I do not have much input on when the encryption ought to be started, outside of "as soon as possible" once the link is established, providing that the ONU is not explicitly told to disable the encryption via the explicit control message.
  

Regards

Marek

On 3/7/23 15:22, Glen Kramer wrote:

Thank you Steve!

 

Based on this contribution and the discussion we had at the last meeting, I updated my slides. I removed slides that are not relevant anymore and tried to make the remaining slides look more like a proposal. There are still many questions that the WG need to resolve. They are summarized on the last 4 slides.

 

Let’s discuss the attached slides on the reflector first. Then we can have another call a week or two from now.

I moved this email from the WG reflector to TF4 reflector. All, please respond with your suggestions and concerns.

 

Glen

 

 

 

From: Steve Goeringer <s.goeringer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 8:18 AM
To: STDS-1904-WG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [1904-ANWG] Slides used for discussion last night

 

Let me know if you have questions. Thanks for inviting me contribute to the discussion.

 

Steve Goeringer

Distinguished Technologist

Director, Emerging Security Technologies

CableLabs® 

---

To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-WG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-WG&A=1

---

To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1

---

To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1