Re: [babel] Minor clarification to HMAC

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> Fri, 28 June 2019 14:01 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 1FD291200B5 for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:01:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 Tni8Ai-cSY6H for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C03512004A for <babel@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:01:20 -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=1561730477; bh=FYRGoweoJm0LiN9KLHz0V2GMomVjmX/9zbof8cGL97Q=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=wUV9vVjYewgJk+m24yGHzPB3/sOcSUWjrtOCd81oTiX8awsvXMglf9IOptvQFBAN2 4WMPi71UenXvV6wQmypl6DuQtQKUlxyxPyhup7C8POxj/5gxOiYpyOGdlUYfbX2bCc Ei70OqR0ciwMnYLxkVaht2nSUWiVsMxd8qOlsW4F6DwT89rAGo3l46uAJuFLxsKsk/ x3NVc/jWP7grrYK6UHSCkzymLiPbjVvTdanuCMlaqTeWt44A9wguPKJ3nXJVSu8hXE 31eWXM51yEU77wJ2j0p2KCGYjdo5X073Vie6DVg00bmbAdo1ir3KGo/P2OyaBoA8SM agITMdTcz7yxA==
To: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>, 'Juliusz Chroboczek' <jch@irif.fr>, "'babel@ietf.org'" <babel@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E1FAFA0@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
References: <874l49j158.wl-jch@irif.fr> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114E1FAFA0@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:01:16 +0200
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <878stl95cj.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/wM_-Waw7EL6pEBY1-TH5nR_Ekss>
Subject: Re: [babel] Minor clarification to HMAC
X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:01:22 -0000

"STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com> writes:

>> The draft says that a neighbour entry MUST NOT be created before HMAC is
>> verified (Section 4.3 first bullet).
>> 
>> It later says that a neighbour entry "might need to be created" when a
>> challenge is sent, and "may need to be created" when a challenge is
>> received.  However, it does not say whether it is legal to create an entry
>> earlier.
>> 
>> I would therefore like to kindly request the permission of the group and the
>> chairs to add the following between the first and second bullet points of
>> Section 4.3:
>> 
>>   * A neighbour entry for the sender of the packet MAY be created at this
>>     stage.  (Alternatively, an implementation MAY delay the creation of
>>     a neighbour entry until a challenge request or reply is received.)
>> 
>> This clarification does not invalidate any implementations, it just makes the
>> intent of the draft authors more explicit.
>
> +1
> I think this is a good change.

+1

-Toke