Re: [netconf] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Mon, 04 November 2019 08:11 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67F70120227 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 00:11:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 MoSh-YaUI7hy for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 00:11:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4DE412006D for <netconf@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 00:11:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.41]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 174F91AE018B; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 09:11:49 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 09:11:19 +0100 (CET)
Message-Id: <20191104.091119.1760037446043812190.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: kent+ietf@watsen.net
Cc: netconf@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <0100016e1d98c767-57716d36-7f50-41d9-9641-360626517728-000000@email.amazonses.com>
References: <0100016e1a0d419b-b221bfcc-d3cd-4386-a016-474e2303fba0-000000@email.amazonses.com> <20191030.132839.500650494712032488.mbj@tail-f.com> <0100016e1d98c767-57716d36-7f50-41d9-9641-360626517728-000000@email.amazonses.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 25.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/BhoXhhw7GOvzve9Ax3kFOrMkvuE>
Subject: Re: [netconf] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 08:12:01 -0000

Hi,

Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net> wrote:
> [moving this fork in the 'netmod' discussion to the 'netconf' list]
> 
> 
> >> The "tls-server-parameters" container defines the certificates used to
> >> authenticate the client's cert.  In many deployments, regardless how
> >> the client cert is authenticated, the "client-identification" section only
> >> needs to explain how to extract the "name" from the cert, a fingerprint
> >> isn't needed to identify either the client's end-entity or some
> >> intermediate cert.
> > 
> > Ok.  To me this sounds like you need a more complex^wsophisticated
> > client identification mechansim than what a plain cert-to-name gives
> > you.  I don't think there is anything wrong with the current
> > cert-to-name grouping.  So let's continue this discussion in the
> > netconf ML, where this model is being developed.
> 
> In an attempt to resolve this issue, I modified both ietf-netconf-server
> and ietf-restconf-server as follows:
> 
> OLD:
>         uses x509c2n:cert-to-name;
> 
> NEW:
>         uses x509c2n:cert-to-name {
>           refine "cert-to-name/fingerprint" {
>             mandatory false;
>             description
>               "A 'fingerprint' value does not need to be specified
>                when the 'cert-to-name' mapping is independent of
>                fingerprint matching.  A 'cert-to-name' having no
>                fingerprint value will match any client certificate
>                and therefore should only be present at the end of
>                the user-ordered 'cert-to-name' list.";
>           }
>         }

Did you see my email "client identification in ietf-netconf-server"?
I don't think this refinement is the correct solution.


/martin