Re: [IPsec] graveyard: deprecate->historic

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 13 January 2020 18:54 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.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 8C5D912096D for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:54:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 D-haCDVOwCXi for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:54:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C376312088C for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:54:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D2903897D; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 13:53:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB070A3B; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 13:53:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: ipsec@ietf.org, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.2001131142420.31187@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <A8FABB55-C89E-4DDE-88CA-9A5839E023B2@sn3rd.com> <20191223184651.GC35479@kduck.mit.edu> <a0ac2861-d106-a464-be49-53fcc3dc802a@lounge.org> <20200113063541.GB66991@kduck.mit.edu> <fdde4e33-da84-3f00-f30d-6eab2daa084f@lounge.org> <alpine.LRH.2.21.2001131142420.31187@bofh.nohats.ca>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 13:53:56 -0500
Message-ID: <16667.1578941636@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/YAXRwWzwYVd5mbr-Y1AYHFED2EM>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] graveyard: deprecate->historic
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 18:54:10 -0000

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
    >> IKEv1 is done, it's over, it's dead. It's been like that for more than
    >> a decade.

    > I think there is a big difference between "done developing it" and
    > "done running it". A decade ago almost everything was IKEv1. Today,
    > with the exception of Android and ten year old gear, everything is
    > IKEv2. And Android is scheduled to fix that this summer. So the move to
    > Historic does seem valid now, and was not 10 years ago.

+1

    >> We already made a statement that we won't touch IKEv1 anymore and we
    >> made that statement fifteen years ago. And we're still doing "die die
    >> die" stuff that's now been refashioned into a "graveyard" effort in
    >> order to address the sensitive sensibilities of the new IETF, but it's
    >> still the same thing. It's trying add an underscore and an exclamation
    >> point to a statement that was already made.  Because we're really
    >> serious this time-- it's in the graveyard!

    > I agree, it is kind of a symbolic gesture. But I think it will help
    > (and not harm), so I think we should just publish it for those who can
    > use it as a lever to migrate more older setups to new. To be honest,
    > the biggest gain will be that people stop using DH1024, DH1536 and SHA1
    > that are defacto the only DH groups used with IKEv1.

It will gain more than symbolism if it becomes an audit checkpoint, and will
actually push people to upgrade.

-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-