RE: replay field size
Roy Pereira <rpereira@timestep.com> Mon, 10 February 1997 03:22 UTC
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa03287; 9 Feb 97 22:22 EST
Received: from portal.ex.tis.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03466; 9 Feb 97 22:22 EST
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id PAA03674 for ipsec-outgoing; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 15:36:57 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=TimeStep_Corpora%l=TSNTSRV2-970209204207Z-1699@tsntsrv2.timestep.com>
From: Roy Pereira <rpereira@timestep.com>
To: "'ipsec@tis.com'" <ipsec@tis.com>, 'Derrell Piper' <piper@tgv.com>
Subject: RE: replay field size
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 15:42:07 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
ESP ad AH _should_ be very similar and thus utilize the same features. Having one use a 32-bit replay counter and the other use a 64-bit one is silly as Derrell stated. If 64-bit alignment is required, as in IPv6, then padding should be appended to the end of the header if it is needed due to the size of the digest algorithm used. Why was RFC2085 (HMAC-MD5 IP Authentication with Replay Prevention) released with a 64-bit replay counter if so many of us objected? Furthermore, why wasn't a generic digest algorithm RFC released (HMAC-x Authentication) instead? We must standardize the common elements of our IPSEC protocols. Things like Replay Counter, HMAC, Digest Algorithms, Cipher Algorithms, generation of Keys from keying material. All of these common elements should be the same for all 'transforms' and not have to be re-defined/re-invented in every transform RFC. Can you imagine every cipher algorithm defining a different way to generate its keys and IV from the keying material? We should be able to just plug in a new cipher algorithm and a new digest algorithm without having to re-invent the wheel. Just plug in their identifiers and go...The common RFCs (ESP, AH, IPSEC-DOI) should define how to this without having to write a new transform RFC. This way we do not need to create a new transform RFC for every combination of parameters. For example, 3DES-Replay-HMAC-SHA1-LZS, has five parameters; cipher algorithm, replay, keyed function, digest algorithm, and compression algorithm. With five parameters we can have quite a lot of transform RFCs. Cipher Algorithm: None, DES, 3DES, RC5, Blowfish, IDEA Replay Protection: No Replay, Replay Keyed Function: None, Keyed, HMAC Digest Algorithm: None, MD5, SHA1, Tiger Compression Algorithm: None, LZS, GZIP 6 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 3 = 432 different transform RFC combinations!!! ---------- From: Derrell Piper[SMTP:piper@tgv.com] Sent: Saturday, February 08, 1997 7:45 PM To: ipsec@tis.com Subject: replay field size There was clear consensus at the ANX IPSEC bakeoff last week to make the size of the replay field 32-bits for both AH and ESP. If we _must_ have alignment for IPv4 IPSEC then the additional bits should be specified as alignment. No one wants to do 64-bit math for replay computation. It's silly. In my opinion, IPv4 is misaligned for 64-bit hardware anyway and I don't see the point of aligning the fields just to keep the protocol consistent with IPv6. I don't think this issue needs the Security AD to resolve. I think we already have consensus. Let's hear now from anyone who absolutely must have 64 bits or else move to revise AH and ESP to reflect consensus. We have much more interesting things to argue about. Derrell
- RE: replay field size Roy Shamir
- RE: replay field size Michael J. Oehler
- Re: replay field size Niels Ferguson
- replay field size Derrell Piper
- Re: replay field size Matt Thomas
- RE: replay field size Roy Pereira
- RE: replay field size Ran Atkinson
- RE: replay field size Roy Pereira
- Re: replay field size Tim Bass (IETF)
- RE: replay field size Rob Adams
- Re: replay field size Dan McDonald
- RE: replay field size Ran Atkinson
- Re: replay field size Robert Glenn
- RE: replay field size Roy Pereira
- RE: replay field size Dan McDonald
- Re: replay field size Germano Caronni
- Re: replay field size John Keating
- Re: replay field size Derrell Piper
- Re: replay field size Ran Atkinson
- Re: replay field size wei
- RE: replay field size Stephen Kent
- Re: replay field size Matt Thomas
- RE: replay field size Phil Karn
- Re: replay field size Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: replay field size Perry E. Metzger
- Re: replay field size Niels Ferguson
- Re: replay field size Bill Sommerfeld
- Re: replay field size Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: replay field size Uri Blumenthal
- RE: replay field size Bob Monsour
- RE: replay field size Stephen Kent
- RE: replay field size Stephen Kent
- Re: replay field size Stephen Kent
- Re: replay field size Stephen Kent
- Re: replay field size Ran Atkinson
- Re: replay field size Steven Bellovin
- Re: replay field size Ran Atkinson
- Re: replay field size Jim Thompson
- Re: replay field size Bart Preneel