IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Adoption call for draft-tjhai-ipsecme-hybrid-qske-ikev2

"Bruckert, Leonie" <Leonie.Bruckert@secunet.com> Fri, 08 November 2019 10:09 UTC

Return-Path: <Leonie.Bruckert@secunet.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 E09EE120088 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 02:09:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 iDoAhxVq1xKB for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 02:09:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com (a.mx.secunet.com [62.96.220.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56657120077 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 02:09:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B57205AE; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 11:09:30 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 91KVc6J9OWLO; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 11:09:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-essen-01.secunet.de (mail-essen-01.secunet.de [10.53.40.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECB1A20422; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 11:09:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from MAIL-ESSEN-02.secunet.de ([fe80::4431:e661:14d0:41ce]) by mail-essen-01.secunet.de ([fe80::1c79:38b7:821e:46b4%16]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 11:09:27 +0100
From: "Bruckert, Leonie" <Leonie.Bruckert@secunet.com>
To: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>, "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [IPsec] Adoption call for draft-tjhai-ipsecme-hybrid-qske-ikev2
Thread-Index: AQHVkpf3/gT88/YtD06p05DKyCtIRKd8bBWAgASiAQA=
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 10:09:27 +0000
Message-ID: <DE8E4C1F24911E469CC24DD4819274AAA584846D@mail-essen-02.secunet.de>
References: <23999.22463.132733.702468@fireball.acr.fi> <bbc06ef4428b4e57b66e991fee0d8c20@nm.ifi.lmu.de>
In-Reply-To: <bbc06ef4428b4e57b66e991fee0d8c20@nm.ifi.lmu.de>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-exclaimer-md-config: 2c86f778-e09b-4440-8b15-867914633a10
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/pkrCbXPMkrB65SbKi0GL6kLaCQ4>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Adoption call for draft-tjhai-ipsecme-hybrid-qske-ikev2
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: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 10:09:36 -0000

We think that it's very important to add post quantum key exchange to IKEv2 and therefore strongly support adoption. However, there are still some things that could be improved further, e.g.  transmission of pq keys/cipher texts for Child SAs.

BTW, we performed an interop test. Valery will present the results at the upcoming meeting.

Regards
Leonie

> 
> Hey,
> I also strongly support adoption.
> 
> >   It is an open question whether or not it is feasible to build a
> >   Quantum Computer (and if so, when one might be implemented), but if
> >
> > Feasibility of some quantum computer is becoming much less of an open
> > question; perhaps we want some qualifiers about efficiency, scale,
> > and/or general-purpose-nature.
> > Do we have a reference for this "it is believed", or is it just the
> > outcome of the WG discussions?
> 
> Regarding this discussion (and sorry if this was discussed before and I didn't
> realize).
> Do we really need the term post-quantum in the title (and maybe even in
> the abstract)?
> The draft tells how to do multiple/hybrid key-exchanges in IKEv2, PQ is the
> major motivation but not the only use case.
> As far as I'm familiar with the draft, you could easily do DH + ECDH with it (and
> if not I'd really like it be like that).
> 
> Regards
> Tobias
> 
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: IPsec <ipsec-bounces@ietf.org> Im Auftrag von Tero Kivinen
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 3. November 2019 23:42
> > An: ipsec@ietf.org
> > Betreff: [IPsec] Adoption call for draft-tjhai-ipsecme-hybrid-qske-ikev2
> >
> > This is adoption call for the draft-tjhai-ipsecme-hybrid-qske-ikev2
> > draft to be accepted to be WG Document. This draft has been around for
> > some time, and we have been discussing it in the meetings.
> >
> > If you support adopting this document as WG Document, then send email
> > indicating your support to the ipsec@ietf.org mailing-list. If you have any
> > comments or reservations send them to the list too.
> >
> > This adoption call finishes 2019-11-11.
> > --
> > kivinen@iki.fi
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IPsec mailing list
> > IPsec@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email