IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Error in RFC6290

Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com> Sun, 30 December 2012 13:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir@checkpoint.com>
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 05B8921F8958 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 05:01:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.506
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.506 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.093, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mO+5+QeszFRk for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 05:01:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.checkpoint.com (smtp.checkpoint.com [194.29.34.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4948821F871A for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 05:01:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([194.29.34.147]) by smtp.checkpoint.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qBUD1cSl006692; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 15:01:38 +0200
X-CheckPoint: {50E039A6-0-1B221DC2-2FFFF}
Received: from IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([169.254.2.238]) by IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([169.254.2.238]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 15:01:38 +0200
From: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
To: Valery Smyslov <svanru@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [IPsec] Error in RFC6290
Thread-Index: AQHN4y/c3fArnE5T60Wa6aVDlN07vJgqwzRAgABuPYCAAC2JiIAF1CyA
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:01:37 +0000
Message-ID: <4613980CFC78314ABFD7F85CC30277210EE0BD0F@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com>
References: <20121203223404.5441.71025.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E7FA5DBC7DB747779E6E6D73460A6615@buildpc> <4613980CFC78314ABFD7F85CC30277210EDFD9D0@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com> <B1F8AE12E3604526980FA756C8F2DB09@buildpc> <DF562289B5D540F095DA9CD3B21AB3D0@buildpc> <4613980CFC78314ABFD7F85CC30277210EE0910F@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com> <50DB30CF.7010604@gmail.com> <472FFB92C2804A6B8EDFD96421D52B42@chichi>
In-Reply-To: <472FFB92C2804A6B8EDFD96421D52B42@chichi>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.31.21.157]
x-kse-antivirus-interceptor-info: scan successful
x-kse-antivirus-info: Clean
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <40C4F2048115A4459FCE44F5C7B78EE8@ad.checkpoint.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "<ipsec@ietf.org>" <ipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Error in RFC6290
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: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:01:45 -0000

I agree.

On Dec 26, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Valery Smyslov <svanru@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Yaron,
> 
> oh, you've catched one more error in this text - it mixed up terms "ticket"
> (used in RFC5723 as Session Resumption ticket) and "token"
> (used in RFC6290 as QCD token). I din't notice that. You are right,
> that "ticket" (Session Resumption) is sent in IKE_SESSION_RESUME,
> but RFC6290 talks where QCD token must be sent. And from my understanding
> of the whole protocol it must not be sent in clear under any circumstances
> (otherwise eavesdropper can easily tear down IKE SA), so the only logical
> place for it in case of IKE SA resumption is IKE_AUTH exchange
> that immediately follows IKE_SESSION_RESUME. So, I think,
> correct text should be:
> 
>    For session resumption, as specified in [RFC5723], the situation is
>    similar.  The responder, which is necessarily the peer that has
>    crashed, SHOULD send a new QCD_TOKEN in IKE_AUTH exchange
>    that immediately followes IKE_SESSION_RESUME exchange.
>    If the Initiator is also a token maker, it needs to send a QCD_TOKEN in
>    the same IKE_AUTH exchange.
> 
> Best wishes,
> Valery.

v2.20.0 | Report a Bug | By Email