Re: [dtn-security] Updated SBSP Document - Canonicalization of Extension Blocks

Amy Alford <aloomis@sarn.org> Tue, 03 June 2014 00:53 UTC

Return-Path: <aloomis@sarn.org>
X-Original-To: dtn-security@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn-security@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4CCD1A0004 for <dtn-security@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:53:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 X5SQFZsyaGAM for <dtn-security@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oa0-f51.google.com (mail-oa0-f51.google.com [209.85.219.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BADAB1A0002 for <dtn-security@irtf.org>; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id n16so5450553oag.38 for <dtn-security@irtf.org>; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 17:53:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=J52FXJP9STYP0s4heGCu8PrCReMMVzss8gnXuscZGDs=; b=N3lETupxfT2FHUw2erQqpw9ytp3Wb49UGtizWh46TYnYrMBZ5dRtpcmnMZvZp9ZrBh UfaIAy1l+Vy58yXvpmYRRb7uL/5pWB7T8NEr5Ryu5fbQTka0yJqwA03dbP40gFUu7mfh xxi8j3lD7zeZZZ2IOzsyWb5fGO44XHduPsNmnuNvEhQCy1wKw2D5kk341F5ZxKP8esuV 4EqPtYtfY3Ry9TFIj7aOkMYCYmIe6FZtE9yDMa4rTmocyp/UGe/3yT1SdzI7a/SnUxG2 7wgvBzdsf6PkX9PIKH09W3b0dWLDEqk0hTjdksJWqIKlLpxjRYrnbcGqDzcDqcH5+LrK SF2g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnCL5/IiL9r/IFDT1YBLP6ykpKvy8vCYx1LFv3tjVQA+g45hs9YrWsBnJu9U4UAy7yW6En7
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.163.45 with SMTP id yf13mr8058698obb.66.1401756786459; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 17:53:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.176.5 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:53:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <94CFB3711B4CAE4DBFC5BEB3374BF0C60D8E85@NDMSMBX404.ndc.nasa.gov>
References: <94CFB3711B4CAE4DBFC5BEB3374BF0C60D8E85@NDMSMBX404.ndc.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 20:53:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CAB9rx+-n5qyfs=tV3VPjvNhHJNocz_A7Y=3MVZP89_7cnHBC0g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Amy Alford <aloomis@sarn.org>
To: "Zoller, David A. (MSFC-EO50)[HOSC SERVICES CONTRACT]" <david.a.zoller@nasa.gov>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f503b5c5198fd04fae3efad
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn-security/kXNaMBy8rv5L8xQEczOeF_wcR_M
Cc: "Burleigh, Scott C \(JPL-312G\)\[Jet Propulsion Laboratory\]" <scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov>, "dtn-security@irtf.org" <dtn-security@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [dtn-security] Updated SBSP Document - Canonicalization of Extension Blocks
X-BeenThere: dtn-security@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group \(DTNRG\) - Security." <dtn-security.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/dtn-security>, <mailto:dtn-security-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn-security/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn-security@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-security-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-security>, <mailto:dtn-security-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 00:53:15 -0000

On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Zoller, David A. (MSFC-EO50)[HOSC SERVICES
CONTRACT] <david.a.zoller@nasa.gov> wrote:

>
> ·         I don’t see a simplification of the dictionary issue as-is
> either; although, the separating semicolons are not really needed.
>
We discussed this when brainstorming the draft, and I was concerned that
the uri "dtn:foo" and the uri "dtnf:oo" hash to the same thing if you
cannonicalize without the colon.  Similarly, if there's no delimiter
between dictionary entries, there's ambiguity.  I don't see anything
nefarious you can do with this, but it's undesirable that two different
bundles have the same hash, even if one of them is nonsense.