Re: [Int-area] draft-learmonth-intarea-rfc1226-bis-00

Derek Fawcus <dfawcus+lists-int-area@employees.org> Tue, 02 June 2020 09:13 UTC

Return-Path: <dfawcus@employees.org>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B894E3A0ABA for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 02:13:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 UK58g-MvjR4E for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 02:13:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clarinet.employees.org (clarinet.employees.org [198.137.202.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BED9F3A0ABD for <Int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 02:13:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by clarinet.employees.org (Postfix, from userid 1736) id 526BB4E11D37; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 09:13:53 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2020 10:13:53 +0100
From: Derek Fawcus <dfawcus+lists-int-area@employees.org>
To: "Iain R. Learmonth" <irl@hambsd.org>
Cc: Int-area@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200602091353.GA48168@clarinet.employees.org>
References: <159004528499.11433.5479167060208316355@ietfa.amsl.com> <90e3bce1-cd60-b45b-d4d9-11da99ee2093@hambsd.org> <CAMGpriW21fyfzJjzfR=SnUf-GujQKOhaPJQd_0nDJwps8-y_NQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMGpriWbro8hAZUn+zLzWZKV9uD3Q6-nX5Hj6PjZep_VqrB++g@mail.gmail.com> <80e7193e-e9b2-53ca-6be4-3d8f0b0a593b@hambsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <80e7193e-e9b2-53ca-6be4-3d8f0b0a593b@hambsd.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/d7UqipptTAmVfEIzISpwvi9xOGk>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-learmonth-intarea-rfc1226-bis-00
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 09:13:55 -0000

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 08:16:31PM +0100, Iain R. Learmonth wrote:
> 
> I do not want to forbid the use of non-NULL encryption. This phrasing
> may also be misleading as RFC4543 also provides encryption transforms
> that do not provide confidentiality. Instead of talking about NULL
> specifically, this could be changed to require use of a transform that
> does not provide confidentiality.

Given the general 'no encryption' rule for HAM transmissions, how about
making use of WESP (RFC 5840) when traversing an amateur RF link,
and ESP when going over other links with non-NULL encryption?

That would then explicitly signal that the payload is not encrypted,  and
allow for easy non heuristic based extraction of the payload.

DF