IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-auth-announce-06

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Sat, 23 March 2024 03:34 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4C6C14F60B; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 20:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BEqvQ9obsaFo; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 20:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.85]) (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 096D6C14F6AD; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 20:34:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4V1lF32Sj1z2G5; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 04:34:47 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1711164887; bh=CYzPS/r05m2pMa/URPXHhj7W99WuTvAuWvlFfEpXGVo=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:Cc:In-Reply-To:To; b=hc20gIsiHhpC/N18C2KUB2gZlH/ywvzfCJmh19h0O7skfjn6nCUrCVNXJvD76tE00 8eUTf2WglpMRIdDIdFD0a9YX90Pp94JJ76tWqRR/QpohNE68iHi2F9qJ+p67WxiBE9 2Wwe7wfEYri7AW/EnSIFk5Fk4vrdMyy1d6P4h0Xc=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2IlxeQXidGAe; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 04:34:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 04:34:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [185.194.184.56]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3726119CA1E; Fri, 22 Mar 2024 23:34:44 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:34:29 +1000
Message-Id: <5913A459-D85C-4620-BF36-775653300745@nohats.ca>
References: <171116281000.19763.4229256017849623476@ietfa.amsl.com>
Cc: art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-auth-announce.all@ietf.org, ipsec@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <171116281000.19763.4229256017849623476@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (21D61)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/3m13JOzRnmDe93TJARMmGacbA9c>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-auth-announce-06
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 03:34:55 -0000

> On Mar 23, 2024, at 13:00, Marc Blanchet via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Comment 1)
> The draft does not specify any fallback procedure or how to handle the
> situation when no proper authentication  method can be chosen by one of the
> peers. Maybe it is specified elsewhere? Or maybe it is so obvious there is no
> point in saying? Or it may be useful to specify some?

It is handled by the regular AUTH process of RFC 7296. This document just adds an “announce list” of auth methods supported to make choosing easier.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email