|
P1619.3 MSG Minutes 2007-12-05 |
|
|
|
|
Written by Matt Ball
|
|
Wednesday, 05 December 2007 |
The regular meeting of P1619.3 MSG group was held on Dec 5th, 2007. Ravi Kavuri was in the chair and Matt Ball took notes.
Attendees:
Ravi Kavuri, NetApp
Subhash, NetApp
Matt Ball, MV Ball Tech
Kevin Marks, Dell
Kevin Butt, IBM
Glen Jaquette, IBM
Landon Noll, NeoScale
No Agenda for this meeting.
General DiscussionQuestion: "Can we limit the protocol to only IP (internet protocol)" (i.e. should we leave out T10?)
Subhash: In practice, canonical XML is not compatible.
Ravi: Recommend that the customers use SSL (or TLS), but allow key-wrapping with pre-shared key.
Supported transports: SSL (or TLS), IPsec, or none
Only allow 'none' if the payload is protected using XML-ENC or similar encryption.
Matt: Can we drop either SSL or IPsec? (probably not)
Question: Do we want to keep states (sessions)?
Subhash: We should allow communications that don't use sessions -- for example send the password each time in an auth envelope. -- There was more discussion about sessions, and the general feel was that
ASN.1 (i.e. binary interface)? Should we allow this? The group (IBM, NetApp, Dell) thought that a binary representation will be necessary for many implementations. (although ASN.1 is probably too complicated -- it's roughly as complicated as XML)
Glen: We don't really have a solution for doing key management over SCSI -- i.e., a way of getting P1619.3 keys into a tape drive.
Subhash: Suggestion to translate the objects and operands into both XML (SOAP) and ASN.1 DER.
Glen presented a slide last july talking about a proposal. Glen could provide more details. This would use a SCSI-like protocol and would be a departure from the current XML-centric thinking.
Goals for next meeting:
Glen will put together presentation showing a binary (SCSI-like) protocol.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:25 pm
|
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 05 December 2007 )
|
