IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] WESP and reliability

Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 05 January 2012 06:35 UTC

Return-Path: <yaronf.ietf@gmail.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 A07E421F87B5 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 22:35:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.486
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.486 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 5xW3XCoqSa4y for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 22:35:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-f44.google.com (mail-ee0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E059C21F8799 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 22:35:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by eekc14 with SMTP id c14so127131eek.31 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:35:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=F1HOYNx34zjeAcxkB5+mkyfdZST/9B88UKmDG/CTcs8=; b=Ztsxub13dQrKiHhXW4B5snwlLi+JkdeV+WIUBGJej89P21eT8FbJvM1uDqTSIQnUhc oTZDYf2FnOTUSyECr0sJRjYvmVqttAMeiwrd+sxQdTKZog/9i/zTQ3YCJVanV22TMZwv qJFjBqb/7kMLm18YAxJDdKJaIo1u/bbhDOZ90=
Received: by 10.14.50.204 with SMTP id z52mr302184eeb.92.1325745319653; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:35:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.0.6] ([109.67.155.85]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t59sm229726298eeh.10.2012.01.04.22.35.17 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:35:18 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4F0544A3.8050706@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 08:35:15 +0200
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111124 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jack Kohn <kohn.jack@gmail.com>
References: <12533D04-6B3F-490F-935B-4F1FA612C938@gmail.com> <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350D027BB46F@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> <F1B15794-3291-4E71-BE26-A3559F408B01@gmail.com> <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350D027BB484@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> <23AFA108-5B72-4CB0-8498-6CC27FC79F96@gmail.com> <CAA1nO734gfXYJLeLU9iYxoArPZJ3Xo3MsXy0Rt9zgoTciBCZbQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOg0Gsxxf8T66XNVLHtR1Tk9yHFDGw96tr0UkEh6x5uYpQ@mail.gmail.com> <48CB2A9F-D59C-462F-8C7A-82127A217703@gmail.com> <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350D028A2AE4@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com> <5C745AC3-FA25-42BE-9848-DDEA3078A1FF@gmail.com> <493ECD00-71C7-4471-9B33-9F7F903ECB14@vpnc.org> <541DCEA7-C5A6-42C6-A1CB-DCF91677FB08@gmail.com> <4F04AF7B.1010005@gmail.com> <CAA1nO732Mg1u=p171LS_6M96kZpy8kCnmpbhZAFjKbTL72eSCg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA1nO732Mg1u=p171LS_6M96kZpy8kCnmpbhZAFjKbTL72eSCg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IPsec ME WG List <ipsec@ietf.org>, RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] WESP and reliability
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, 05 Jan 2012 06:35:22 -0000

I agree.

     Yaron

On 01/05/2012 01:56 AM, Jack Kohn wrote:
>> method (RFC 5879)? Or else is there anything missing in WESP that we
>> should pay attention to, for example, maybe it doesn't support specific
>> IV or ICV sizes that those non IETF-goers are using?
> This stumped me for some time and i went back to read RFC 5840.
>
> The HdrLen in the WESP header will always point to the start of the
> unencrypted payload for the devices to inspect. No matter what IV or
> ICV size folks use, WESP will always work (contrary to claims made by
> a few individuals on the list).
>
> Jack

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email