[Hipsec] IPCOMP support in HIP

Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Wed, 09 March 2016 15:38 UTC

Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B861012D70B for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 07:38:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aFbw0pmZ4B7f for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 07:38:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com (z9m9z.htt-consult.com []) (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 9346612E0F7 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 07:21:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853E9621A2 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 10:21:02 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at htt-consult.com
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com ([]) by localhost (z9m9z.htt-consult.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id pqYfY9oHoVHY for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 10:20:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F3C67621A0 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 10:20:57 -0500 (EST)
To: hipsec@ietf.org
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
Message-ID: <56E03F56.5040300@htt-consult.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 10:20:54 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/QVZdbOmBlFgFbqvB7ZgvhlVyxRk>
Subject: [Hipsec] IPCOMP support in HIP
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:38:17 -0000

Why did we not create a parameter to negotiate IPCOMP (currently RFC 3173)?

In IKEv2 it is negotiated in NOTIFY messages, not the basic exchange and 
becomes part of the daughter SA(s).

On contrained networks, IPCOMP could well be of value.  Also if HIP is 
used to establish the SAs for SSE (draft-moskowitz-sse-02.txt) and the 
SSE payload is XML, then IPCOMP (or some variant tbd) may be a good thing.


Again, why no IPCOMP parameter?

IPCOMP parameter handled like ESP parameter or like in IKEv2?

How to add an IPCOMP parameter?  If I write a draft for a Generic 
Protocol Compression, I can include a section that defines an 
IPCOMP/GPCOMP parameter.  Or I can add it to DEX (don' want to add that 
at this point, EC25519 fits, IPCOMP is expanding the protocol).