IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] FW: I-D Action: draft-farrelll-mpls-opportunistic-encrypt-00.txt

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Fri, 10 January 2014 16:40 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 472371AE0E1 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:40:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Pyiv5nKI5PME for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:40:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qe0-x22b.google.com (mail-qe0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c02::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE6C91AE139 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:40:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qe0-f43.google.com with SMTP id jy17so4629313qeb.16 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:40:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=2La0Es8Oj5YShoFY4xqeBnGV6ZtSlXk75ClL5ALfvss=; b=Ml7CQ3ZRPhqZ5Z1zV9hM1uYMD0ixrR8/R50TMQZdqt9YEfUcYltpz1HIQcggIfdOim etVhO/CRhQIqgvjqlAO4fLDAnCGBq/1PmJEIPgRFYnmR8qdP0e80CKU70GO17QnA565t tb+0cyXakisNmQmghLJ+hwZ6ubcXqziRFiMOHhU7KwkqSj6TKoPhfdbD4QtyeulUpIiG cZDPUgHaf2Q15bLhciFyOnDWGKgooZgRasfKoqeoWWhj7h7Gi35Zp/MObA6pTUNptAcI PsSghFn4tDIY8YWK2LaqvreJ8sYlhO+9qtwKlRTg3GYExXtazIvSHUDaKvCSBXwd8hDH UEaQ==
X-Received: by 10.224.167.143 with SMTP id q15mr9153047qay.97.1389372020605; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:40:20 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.120.130 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:39:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <6925.1389369966@erosen-linux>
References: <52CEEB4F.2010609@cs.tcd.ie> <6925.1389369966@erosen-linux>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:39:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAA=duU1X6NGqEO=Sh5ayer9ETVrq_ZHHqCvY-gq7h4H14ixZZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: erosen@cisco.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [mpls] FW: I-D Action: draft-farrelll-mpls-opportunistic-encrypt-00.txt
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:40:42 -0000

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com> wrote:
> Adrian> Some people have noted that per hop encryption/decryption might be
> Adrian> an issue.  Others have countered that ETH h/w can already handle
> Adrian> MACsec at line rate.  e2e encryption seems (to me) to be less likely
> Adrian> to be an issue.
>
> I think encryption at the network layer is much more complicated to do at
> scale than is encryption at the data link layer.  There's just a lot more to
> figure out on a per-packet basis, and the system design becomes more
> complex.

I agree with Eric on this point. There is 100 GigE/OTU4 encryption
commercially available (not to mention 10G and 40G as well), so why
not just use that at the link layer?

Cheers,
Andy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email