IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Updated version of RFC5996bis

Paul Wouters <paul@cypherpunks.ca> Thu, 17 October 2013 14:14 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@cypherpunks.ca>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DF8411E8273 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 07:14:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.574
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.574 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.025, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NzamGdB5GyDg for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 07:14:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D08511E8205 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 07:14:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3d0sn00wz4zCCk; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:13:56 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LIASqWY74zYp; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:13:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:13:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 500) id 15868800C4; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:13:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E58A80097; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:13:56 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:13:56 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@cypherpunks.ca>
X-X-Sender: paul@bofh.nohats.ca
To: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <21087.60447.758422.672867@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.10.1310171004250.29460@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <21087.60447.758422.672867@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: "ipsec@ietf.org WG" <ipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Updated version of RFC5996bis
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 14:14:08 -0000

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Tero Kivinen wrote:

> I made new version of the RFC5996bis (yes, I am more than month too
> late from my original time-estimate).
>
> This version removes the Raw RSA public keys

Is that the old version that would be obsoleted by
draft-kivinen-ipsecme-oob-pubkey that no one implemented?

While updating the retransmit timers in libreswan, I found no useful
information in 5996. Is that something we could add? I know it is
local policy but perhaps it would be good to add some guidance for
implementors. Do people use sub-second retries? exponential backoff?
How do people deal with slow wakeup stacks (eg 3G) and preventing of
firsts of duplicate first packets?

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email