Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-checksum-trailer-05: (with DISCUSS)
"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmorton@att.com> Tue, 02 February 2016 19:36 UTC
Return-Path: <acmorton@att.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 283BC1B2FDA; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:36:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
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_HELO_PASS=-0.001] 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 YRJaNbswGipI; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:36:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pink.research.att.com (mail-pink.research.att.com [204.178.8.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D93921B2FE9; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:36:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-green.research.att.com (H-135-207-255-15.research.att.com [135.207.255.15]) by mail-pink.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C192312173F; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 14:39:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njfpsrvexg0.research.att.com [135.207.255.124]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD206E0FBE; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 14:33:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from NJFPSRVEXG0.research.att.com ([fe80::108a:1006:9f54:fd90]) by NJFPSRVEXG0.research.att.com ([fe80::108a:1006:9f54:fd90%25]) with mapi; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 14:36:50 -0500
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmorton@att.com>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 14:36:49 -0500
Thread-Topic: Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-checksum-trailer-05: (with DISCUSS)
Thread-Index: AdFd7CZ7xw/Kul3ERE6J04JReMJDCwABHLkg
Message-ID: <4AF73AA205019A4C8A1DDD32C034631D2E26DF26B5@NJFPSRVEXG0.research.att.com>
References: <20160202190130.28363.17319.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160202190130.28363.17319.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/DCzwqHzomI_4OQR5D6h0pwWFNSQ>
Cc: "ippm-chairs@ietf.org" <ippm-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ippm-checksum-trailer@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ippm-checksum-trailer@ietf.org>, "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-checksum-trailer-05: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 19:36:55 -0000
I think you're right Alissa, the text in 3.2 should be made consistent and mention that authenticated mode is allowed. ok Tal? Al > -----Original Message----- > From: Alissa Cooper [mailto:alissa@cooperw.in] ... > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-checksum-trailer/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > There seems to be a bit of a disconnect between this text in 3.2: > > "As specified in Section 3.4. , the Checksum Complement should only be > used in unauthenticated mode." > > and this text in 3.4.1: > > "A Checksum Complement MAY be used when authentication is enabled. In > this case an intermediate entity can timestamp test packets and > update their Checksum Complement field without modifying the HMAC." > > I can see why not to use the checksum complement in encrypted mode, but > don't see why it can't be used in authenticated mode for TWAMP. > > >
- [ippm] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-… MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-… Tal Mizrahi