IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> Mon, 02 July 2018 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <toke@toke.dk>
X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5613D1294D0 for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:58:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4ccIDvzBQaTt for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:58:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 699571271FF for <babel@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1530550701; bh=Urb9t3O08Uyjfi0MS/efKdU0t+PM9BAuJE+WUrpoxRI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=VOkua12Zk5dqI/+gXXBzo+HThY07V1CnVp+fah8iD6+9/ea4np9Ajt1LlaaMS3n7j SYJ7v3tecEz+BvTMCpAOBpUO2Y/5VRkvXyT/ya/LPSTtlWNQPB4m5RJnsU1w/S1axr fWgXuWOmUOza33p64JCexJUBJ5BMzclmbxEvQVpVcQdS3ZbGgDjSb59gmLuTRxCOYC S8EqRFicVXbpf5n7o7dRX81tfflJOZINyciowCVBlws8k1Vz96I5K4j5OW5D7WHsj4 H1Ss2VclM2Vn7ZtpdBrsASW+FEhDUN+ZdWdaWPv2B7ryKCxHEClInWF4tZCvrMniMa 1mWcR2uSFJt9w==
To: David Schinazi <dschinazi@apple.com>, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
Cc: Weronika Kołodziejak <weronika.kolodziejak@gmail.com>, Clara Dô <clarado_perso@yahoo.fr>, babel@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com>
References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 18:58:31 +0200
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/gNtkq9rjUfVOj_WTNlI0uqhmTIY>
Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." <babel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/>
List-Post: <mailto:babel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel>, <mailto:babel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 16:58:27 -0000

David Schinazi <dschinazi@apple.com> writes:

>>> 10. KeyID
>> 
>>> I think there is value in having a KeyID next to the HMAC to allow better
>>> performance when using multiple keys. RFC7298 had a 16bit KeyID,
>>> and that sounded reasonable to me.
>> 
>> Please describe the user interface to that.
>
> I'm not very familiar with the babeld user interface / config file,
> but I assume you have a place where you set either what the raw key
> value is or what the path to the key file is. Next to there you would
> add an integer. All nodes need to configure the same key, making sure
> they configure the same integer with that key sounds straightforward
> enough?

But why is it needed? It's just one more thing to configure, which makes
configuration more verbose and prone to errors...

-Toke

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email