Re: [babel] Extension of Call for WG adoption of draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis through 2018-05-28

[Juliusz Chroboczek <[e-mail]>]

> This is a reminder that there is an ongoing call for adopt of
> draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis. This message extends the deadline for
> responding through 28 May. Please indicate if you think this draft
> should or should not be adopted as a starting point by the BABEL WG.

I have mixed feelings, and therefore do not know whether I do or don't
support adoption at the current time.

On the one hand:

  - I am convinced that Babel needs a simple, comprehensible,
    implementable auth mechanism that introduces no heavy dependencies
    (possibly in addition to any heavier mechanism, such as DTLS);
  - Denis' draft is a good starting point for obtaining the above.

On the other hand:

  - as described on the list, the protocol appears to be vulnerable to
    replay, due to an unfortunate confusion between symmetric reachability
    (as defined by 6126bis) and security association.  I have a plan for
    fixing the vulnerability (by removing the confusion), but I'd like to
    have a chance to explain my ideas in order to see if they work;
  - the document (as opposed to the protocol) is very difficult to work
    with.  Three reasons for that: (1) an almost complete lack of
    rationale and human-readable intuitions, (2) a tendency to repeat the
    same points multiple times, and (3) a tendency to repeat what is
    already in 6126bis.  This is bad for a security document, and is
    especially worrying since the author has a poor track record of
    listening to stylistic (as opposed to technical) criticisms.

Should the stylistic issues with the document be fixed, and should my
ideas for fixing the vulnerability work out, I'd support adoption with no
hesitation.  As it currently stands, and since I do not trust the author
to fix the editorial issues once the document is adopted, I'm not sure.

-- Juliusz