[Ntp] Antw: [EXT] Re: NTPv5 draft

    >>> "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org> schrieb am 09.12.2020
um 15:56
in Nachricht <51D0EEC3-F30E-4A0F-9DBA-B8D2A8CFA959@akamai.com>:
>>  Now, suddenly people talk about some non‑specific issues that have an
>     > unknown solution. Where were you when NTS was designed? And why does
>     > it need to be solved in NTPv5?
> 
> NTS was designed to add security features to an existing protocol without 
> disrupting it.
> 
> NTPv5 should be designed with security built‑in from the beginning.

I think "security" was "built-in" since NTPv3, but:
Was the security srong enough?
Was the security easy to deploy and use?
Did it need shared secrets between different authority zones?

In v4 autokey tried to address some issues, while adding several new

So what should v5 really bring?

Regards,
Ulrich

> 
> Miroslav's draft is just an individual viewpoint.  I would be against the WG

> adopting it because the author seems to be opposed to the design requirement

> I just mentioned.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org 
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp 