Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption [FORMAL RESPONSES?]

Hal Murray <halmurray@sonic.net> Thu, 03 June 2021 09:06 UTC

Return-Path: <halmurray@sonic.net>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD4023A30E0 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 02:06:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.035
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.035 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no 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 j1GkZ99NUuNO for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 02:06:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04FA3A30DF for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 02:06:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C885540605C; Thu, 3 Jun 2021 02:06:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: kristof.teichel@ptb.de
cc: "NTP WG" <ntp@ietf.org>, Hal Murray <halmurray@sonic.net>
From: Hal Murray <halmurray@sonic.net>
In-Reply-To: Message from kristof.teichel@ptb.de of "Thu, 03 Jun 2021 09:07:45 +0200." <OFF51374C9.98B99AED-ONC12586E9.002729B7-C12586E9.002729B8@ptb.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2021 02:06:54 -0700
Message-Id: <20210603090654.C885540605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/BnHgj1_CevziVgPiaoJBOd6ZDnE>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 08:13:56 -0700
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Re: NTS4UPTP Rev 03 - Formal request for WG adoption [FORMAL RESPONSES?]
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2021 10:03:03 -0000

I don't know anything about PTP (except what the draft explains).

I'm working from draft-gerstung-nts4uptp-02.pdf  (which I got a few minutes 
ago)

I don't see any fatal flaws, but it doesn't feel good.

You will have to prove that phase 2 is secure.  That doesn't look easy to me, 
but I'm not a crypto geek.

Why not move phase 2 to the TLS connection?
If you do that, is there any need for cookies?



-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.