Re: [babel] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-babel-hmac-03

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Sun, 10 March 2019 19:32 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
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 B6AA51271FF; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 PGEABHWINbAh; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd32.google.com (mail-io1-xd32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CE01200ED; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd32.google.com with SMTP id x4so2188483ion.2; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=NvismgbfCWduWOd2YYgr1ePLbo9ywK64Ti1blQtAjhs=; b=ECQFKMJttPuDO+jZp0j24PxJjnHnun4jlJacQGox3WlBORUSFm2DWEOykOaU4ASjAZ f3HV/yaKJYPtAh8dAk9u3Ha5cdWDlECvhcDzg9zRYasycJKUobq8hBLeqlYfoyQv89xi pK+5rJ+1R3hMVzHDHEqN0Jvnc8JSo2T9tYfzzcUbFElIZhhRbx9InlfkQnVNtqa7Dwlq NFKKNyj6VVx87wkHofb9KL1zW+5XNqGpGJxHqAnfCjmRJb2JehwVIbxNnIX4sfo2KDXF XVfgrTpflwmzasuD6fpUpuPc5y8gxONDoIfKXekF1sRyaACcWNzyRik9HqdtZTQ/WGkY lSpA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=NvismgbfCWduWOd2YYgr1ePLbo9ywK64Ti1blQtAjhs=; b=M2ZPy1M8BOrvx19LIowT9f5s0xnc/Kn4hs221FEThG31k3vY6p+VqPW7UNlGelDKkU vpFaIEXIF5Y+Kaon++Vdq6wmHoMNO2M36DGybPKcNZ8p3j9n11gAlp3lFARlVIjnUFqv k2qkpLdS7eUT+hMs2MOI5eM/nQhd4mJ7uCR5wEFjNYq7EZM4o8JtpnpTwbNPgXFcGgdB Z9NbKNFCX2TXPRfU3wMznt+PXYcWQROqm1qzDnMQ8LLmU6Kwt1Z3clrsBEGWnKf4JoH0 43G8OOZlfZc+giIuUJsRjxq+XfkDfhRog+P+Z346UUDdZtBj3yRpUbCTuWVq2W9Vdftw 823g==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXEjVrn9a3i0bmxUt1uOOFyyi3se80blAIlfGwXTLOXX3R8aIdw DRbCWroocH1yL+yppd+S6gHG3pNrnBT6JxTLJyw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz2aPqP+nr+vAEq/1RXLwLAY3n9aWbyCaX32O0O08Yspql5scofTTDALeDHgTBuwllCaEteIzDe1BcJ/3qTQp0=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:5006:: with SMTP id e6mr15741946iob.132.1552246365005; Sun, 10 Mar 2019 12:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAF4+nEG0pDf+SGUWJiZrB6y4RnY2aUPTz+bCVn7+FX1NqCjcQA@mail.gmail.com> <87mum4kvon.wl-jch@irif.fr>
In-Reply-To: <87mum4kvon.wl-jch@irif.fr>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 15:32:33 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEEUxLvYUbMoWYnC_Z7ZsbhCi92U1uw-4SDTA41BO5hohQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr>
Cc: Babel at IETF <babel@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-babel-hmac@ietf.org, babel-chairs <babel-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000030ab070583c28586"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/babel/zLatt7RBLaLEsIYtUcFQ_kxi4sk>
Subject: Re: [babel] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-babel-hmac-03
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: Sun, 10 Mar 2019 19:32:48 -0000

Hi Juliusz,

Thanks! I consideral my comments resolved.

Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com


On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 8:46 AM Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:

> > Section 2, Page 4, first sentence: "for cryptographic protection" ->
> "for HMAC
> > cryptographic protection"
>
> Done.
>
> > Section 4, page 8/9, Section 4.3.1.2, page 10. I'm slightly confused
> about the
> > interaction of these sections.
>
> Good catch, thanks -- that's actually a mistake in the draft.  The packet
> is accepted unconditionally if the challenge was successful.  I've fixed
> that.
>
> > The various timers here (5 min to discard Neighbor Table entry (Section
> 4.4),
> > 30 seconds challenge expiry timer (Section 4.3.1.1), and 300ms challenge
> rate
> > limit (Section 4.3.1.1)) should be described as configurable with a
> default
> > value of the value currently suggested.
>
> Done.  Default value is SHOULD, configurability is MAY.
>
> > The TLV type values have been assigned.
>
> Done, both in the draft and the implementation.
>
> > The size limit of 192 for nonces should be motivated. Perhaps "to leave
> some
> > room for possible future sub-TLV inclusion".
>
> Clarified.  (Nonces are not self-terminating, so sub-TLVs are not
> possible.  The reason is to make it possible to encode a cookie within
> a nonce, as described in the Security Considerations section.)
>
> > Appendix A: Seems like somewhere in the main text body it should say
> > that "Implementations SHOULD be separately configurable to (1) send or
> > not send HMAC security TLVs and (2) process or ignore HMAC security TLVs
> > on receipt."
>
> Done in the section on data structures.
>
> > Appendix B: Add after Appendix B header and before Appendix B.1 header:
> > "RFC-Editor: Please remove this section before publication".
>
> Done.
>
> Thanks again, Donald.
>
> -- Juliusz
>