[Sis-dtn] Today's telecon

[sburleig.sb at gmail.com]

Hi.  The agenda item for today's meeting was review of Tom Gannett's
editorial RIDs against the BPSec draft (734x5r2.pdf).  Here's what I believe
we agreed on:

*	3.2.2: agreed.  No applicable normative documents exists, so this
language must be non-normative.  Something like "Implementers of security
contexts are encouraged to consult the remarks on key management mechanisms
in CCSDS 350.6-G-1 (reference [6])."
*	4.4.9: two revisions:

*	The words "Endpoint IDentifier (EID)" should be changed to "Node
Identifier" in 4.4.9.
*	"Security Source" should be added to the parameters listed in the
Semantics of the ApplyBIB.request (4.5.2.2) and ApplyBCB.request (4.5.2.7).

*	4.5.9.4 and 4.5.11.2: two resolutions:

*	Removal of all accepted security options from the BIB and removal of
the BIB from the bundle (if all security operations have been removed) are
actually additional Effects of the AcceptBIB.request; 4.5.11.2.2 and
4.5.11.2.3 should be removed (possibly restated as NOTES in 4.5.11.3) and
their language added to 4.5.9.4.
*	Meanwhile, most of the effects currently listed in 4.5.9.4 are
actually (correctly) listed among the Effects on Receipt of
VerifyBIB.request; they can be removed from 4.5.9.4.  The remaining current
Effect ("generates an AcceptBIB.indication") is correct.

*	Similarly, two resolutions for 4.5.10.4 and 4.5.12.2:

*	Removal of all accepted security options from the BCB, removal of
the BCB from the bundle (if all security operations have been removed),
conditional modification of the target blocks of the confidentiality
service, conditional replacement of ciphertext by plaintext, and conditional
removal of target blocks are actually additional Effects of the
AcceptBCB.request; 4.5.12.2.2, 4.5.12.2.3, 4.5.12.2.4, and 4.5.12.2.5 should
be removed (possibly restated as NOTES in 4.5.12.3) and their language added
to 4.5.10.4.
*	Meanwhile, most of the effects currently listed in 4.5.10.4 are
actually (correctly) listed among the Effects on Receipt of
VerifyBCB.request; they can be removed from 4.5.10.4 and moreover the text
regarding the inclusion of decrypted versions of encrypted blocks can be
removed (as this effect is implicit in the other Effects imported from
4.5.12.2).  The remaining Effect ("generates an AcceptBCB.indication") is
correct.

 

One other note that came to me as I was reviewing these: I think the words
"verify the integrity of" should be changed to "effect" (or maybe
"implement") in the Function descriptions of AcceptBIB.request (4.5.9.1) and
AcceptBCB.request (4.5.10.1).  In both cases I think the verification is
performed by the corresponding Verify requests; these Accept requests are
instead issued in response to the information provided in the corresponding
Verify indications.

 

Scott

 

From: SIS-DTN <sis-dtn-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> On Behalf Of Robert C
Durst via SIS-DTN
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 7:47 AM
To: sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: [Sis-dtn] Today's telecon

 

I won't be able to join today's telecon, as I'll be on a monthly call with
IETF DTN WG chairs and Area Directors.

 

I *believe* that Scott B indicated that he could moderate today's call.

 

Best,
Bob

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sis-dtn/attachments/20231005/a5bca4a6/attachment.htm>