Re: Last Call: <draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth-03.txt> (Secure PSK Authentication for IKE) to Informational RFC

Glen Zorn <gwz@net-zen.net> Fri, 22 April 2011 05:08 UTC

Return-Path: <gwz@net-zen.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4B10E0764 for <ietf@ietfc.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:08:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SS2lbxK4vAs6 for <ietf@ietfc.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa07-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa07-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.192.239]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 118A5E06D7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:08:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 18193 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2011 05:08:04 -0000
Received: from unknown (124.120.89.74) by p3plsmtpa07-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (173.201.192.239) with ESMTP; 22 Apr 2011 05:08:02 -0000
Message-ID: <4DB10D2D.6020503@net-zen.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 12:07:57 +0700
From: Glen Zorn <gwz@net-zen.net>
Organization: Network Zen
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org>
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth-03.txt> (Secure PSK Authentication for IKE) to Informational RFC
References: <20110326163349.10560.66105.idtracker@localhost> <4D8EC5C1.1060909@gmail.com> <422a53796c3f69bea881677f9ee7bc10.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
In-Reply-To: <422a53796c3f69bea881677f9ee7bc10.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------000008040001070400050406"
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth@tools.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 05:08:06 -0000

On 4/22/2011 7:54 AM, Dan Harkins wrote:

> 
>   Hi Mykyta,
> 
>   Thank you for reviewing my draft. Responses inline....
> 
> On Sat, March 26, 2011 10:06 pm, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> A question on the flowing extract:
>>
>>> This memo contains a new numberspace to be managed by IANA, a
>>>     registry used to indicate a password preprocessing technique.  The
>>>     initial layout of this registry SHALL be:
>>>
>>>     o   0x00 : None
>>>
>>>     o   0x01 :RFC2759  <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2759>
>>>
>>>     o   0x02 : SASLprep
>>>
>>>     The Prep field is 8 bits long and all other values are available
>>>     through assignment by IANA.  IANA is instructed to assign values
>>>     based on "Specification Required" (see [RFC5226
>>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226>]).
>> It contains the description of new registry. but it fails to give it the
>> distinctive definition.  Among other, what is the exact name of the
>> registry?  How are the fields named?  The sentence "The Prep field is 8
>> bits long and all other values are available through assignment by
>> IANA." also makes me confusing.  This means that the Prep field is not
>> assigned by IANA?  Finally, 0x00 is Unassigned or Reserved?
>>
>> Thus, this extract needs more clarification.
> 
>   How would the following look to you:
> 
>   "This memo contains a new numberspace to be managed by IANA, the
>    password preprocessing method (Prep) registry. The initial layout
>    of this registry SHALL be:
> 
>    o   0x00 : None (no preprocessing is performed)
> 
>    o   0x01 : RFC2759
> 
>    o   0x02 : SASLprep
> 
>    The Prep field is 8 bits long and all other values are available
>    through assignment by IANA.  IANA is instructed to assign values
>    based on "Specification Required" (see [RFC5226])."

This looks strangely familiar ;-).  From RFC 5931:

 The following is the initial layout for the password pre-processing
 method registry:

   o   0x00 : None

   o   0x01 : RFC2759

   o   0x02 : SASLprep

   The Prep field is 8 bits long, and all other values are available
   through assignment by IANA.  IANA is instructed to assign values
   based on "Specification Required" (see [RFC5226]).

Is there some good reason not to use the IANA Registry already
established
(http://www.iana.org/assignments/eap-pwd-parameters/eap-pwd-parameters.xml#eap-pwd-parameters-4)?