Re: [IPsec] WG last call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-esp-null-heuristics-01

Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com> Tue, 22 September 2009 12:19 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir@checkpoint.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A863A6A08 for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.387
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.387 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.212, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hwhyIexwoAMj for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from michael.checkpoint.com (michael.checkpoint.com [194.29.32.68]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 517BE3A692F for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 05:19:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by michael.checkpoint.com (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10) with ESMTP id n8MCKHSr024503 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:20:17 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com ([126.0.0.2]) by il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com ([126.0.0.2]) with mapi; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:20:16 +0300
From: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
To: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf@checkpoint.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:20:14 +0300
Thread-Topic: [IPsec] WG last call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-esp-null-heuristics-01
Thread-Index: Aco7fwqlhXzw3J43SUGDpch0MBbTNw==
Message-ID: <0CBDB9D0-4FBC-4CD4-9F89-2140C3573D8C@checkpoint.com>
References: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC80190AD328329@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com>
In-Reply-To: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC80190AD328329@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.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="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] WG last call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-esp-null-heuristics-01
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 12:19:16 -0000

I support advancing this document, and I think the explanations and  
pseudo code are good.

I do, however, question the value of it in real life.

Security policies or the deep inspection kind usually are something  
like:
  - allow HTTP and HTTPS, and verify headers
  - allow ICMP and DNS
  - maybe some more allowed protocols
  - drop everything else

I'm sure anything enforcing a policy like this will anyway drop ESP- 
non-null, because it doesn't look like one of those allowed protocols.  
However, YMMV so I support publishing this draft.

On Sep 17, 2009, at 11:28 PM, Yaron Sheffer wrote:

> This is to begin a 2 week working group last call for draft-ietf- 
> ipsecme-esp-null-heuristics-01. The target status for this document  
> is Informational.
>
> Please send your comments to the ipsec list by Oct. 1, 2009, as  
> follow-ups to this message.
>
> Note that this document has had very little review until now. We  
> will only progress it as a WG document if we have at least 3 non- 
> editor, non-WG chair reviewers who have read it and approve of it.  
> And yes, this means the pseudocode, too. There has been strong  
> support of ESP-null detection, so this document is likely to be  
> widely implemented. Your review will mean a lot to the technical  
> quality of this document.
>
> Please clearly indicate the position of any issue in the Internet  
> Draft, and if possible provide alternative text. Please also  
> indicate the nature or severity of the error or correction, e.g.  
> major technical, minor technical, nit, so that we can quickly judge  
> the extent of problems with the document.
>
> The document can be accessed here:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipsecme-esp-null-heuristics-01
>
> Thanks,
>             Yaron
>