Re: [babel] HMAC and MTI [was: rather than ripemd160...]

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> Mon, 26 November 2018 15:10 UTC

Return-Path: <jch@irif.fr>
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 6DB09130E31 for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:10:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 XIk6FaEI3fwI for <babel@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:10:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (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 D8A57130F18 for <babel@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:10:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/82085) with ESMTP id wAQFAh8x011929; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 16:10:43 +0100
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7546C65BC6; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 16:10:49 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id ufoZ9LpdYgMZ; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 16:10:43 +0100 (CET)
Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CC7B865BB8; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 16:10:41 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 16:10:41 +0100
Message-ID: <875zwjq3gu.wl-jch@irif.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
To: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi>
Cc: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>, babel-users <babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org>, Babel at IETF <babel@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <48CB71FB-9F90-45E8-9AD2-43AA257234C1@iki.fi>
References: <CAA93jw5fHRm21yEJsabiiOF1ZP7Zh3M_gEgRo0imBOpRGhf0qA@mail.gmail.com> <87in0koun6.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87in0kx98o.fsf@toke.dk> <87a7lwossu.wl-jch@irif.fr> <48CB71FB-9F90-45E8-9AD2-43AA257234C1@iki.fi>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Mon, 26 Nov 2018 16:10:44 +0100 (CET)
X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5BFC0CF3.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5BFC0CF3.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/<jch@irif.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5BFC0CF3.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/xQfZo6zbbBXgyA1OetoAupCuZdo>
Subject: Re: [babel] HMAC and MTI [was: rather than ripemd160...]
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: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 15:10:56 -0000

> Dave had a good point as well though, comparing -2s and -2b performance
> on some set of hardware (e.g. arm, mips, intel) might be in order before
> picking between the two.

HMAC only protects the control traffic, not the data traffic.  I'm not
convinced that performance is particularly critical here.

-- Juliusz