IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: About AH (was Re: [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC8200 (5933))

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 03 March 2020 20:27 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 148443A0915 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 12:27:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 xGJHI7U4TLCZ for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 12:27:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 127EF3A08FD for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 12:27:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465953897F; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:26:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80A3516D; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 15:27:08 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
cc: "suresh.krishnan@gmail.com" <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: About AH (was Re: [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC8200 (5933))
In-Reply-To: <FE156CF2-3C58-43A3-A858-E25FE38C322B@cisco.com>
References: <FE156CF2-3C58-43A3-A858-E25FE38C322B@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.1.1
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: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 15:27:08 -0500
Message-ID: <12656.1583267228@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/pe4QjDr2XDM_Py6IfpqlAZIYqO0>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 20:27:18 -0000

Eric Vyncke \(evyncke\) <evyncke=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > IMHO, any specification breaking AH (e.g., by modifying the NextHeader
    > in transport mode) should clearly note that it 'breaks AH' or
    > constraints its use; but, this is still acceptable for an IETF standard
    > specification IMHO to 'break AH'.

    > Finally, I have spent 10+ years designing and deploying IPsec VPNs and
    > very few of them were using AH and when using AH it was in tunnel mode
    > (except OSPFv3) and until ESP was extended to have authentication.

I concur.
AH had one remaining use, which was to secure extension headers, such as for
use with SEND.  We screwed up the definition of how unknown SPI# should be
processed with AH (the header should be skipped, but the result is rejection).
So, we couldn't use AH when we did SEND.

AH is useless.


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email