IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Ntp] No more options for NTP

Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> Sat, 06 April 2019 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
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 C341F12033B for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Apr 2019 09:07:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 2yoYt83BFkDN for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Apr 2019 09:07:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFF8E1201E6 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Apr 2019 09:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id q66so7717085ljq.7 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Sat, 06 Apr 2019 09:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=HHSSNFGG1d0vNB0sh2MQDa0kb74nKXWdANWjVrK9UK8=; b=RKh09R9l2vODFCLmHWsGEaPPoSmuStFdxAucgNvW4yCmrOxR6Lnmm4QP6hd0wd6Agi ivbOweAkIYZeCjLkcIVBFGAeP+Ms89817hRTpInSndBQHsvTgsTCcKfTLD2+e0Ow/R0E mO2h4h7C4rbKgh1Y4vSmRTP4tVCM9XZFNUbp9m/jRkX+Gnmrrhee0myGiVs1AZY7vSd8 YyVuy5st1Z0iDGLNkK593Xfq5Kbxmvy1dgXE/lOIAWF2NtsZ19dDyOLQGomVkeur+p8V WLja9KhTDHQ1qAIRLrd2R1Dx/KVbcAp+4LTwnVbh0f4u6qHi5M5s50PMD6KG0M/CcBoB wz6Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=HHSSNFGG1d0vNB0sh2MQDa0kb74nKXWdANWjVrK9UK8=; b=WWSvjWM8dZuulpHtx1AxrlWMpgMupfZpTKyYLO94kQBG1QQ57UCsI1BTP4xCV/xRyF amCkAEpdc7JB5g8rmzyRKnTNp26bdRy7ejjAUftVPyrRcNWY/1Z2QJ5NG6368ymQ//n9 lUmcesqLh45vc0E7dq7Yet6ZBNgOFAt/sUNpJJpmBk6Ilo5oRKGeau2Ai9RjYYv3rFwY t7fiHv+os6XAHwzife66cimn9t4p4JOZAou2NSgZneXOWN6KGNGOtEcNyNlcmTC1rYDE gIcQR/1dYqRz7EE13iReoSG4aTUj/yM5qLbQqiZCYTBYNmDjw1reeS+IKDwW5QcZ2qSm 81ng==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV6uF222CMqdD7BmrPhNjC18tsFQM8YB7kzblq/9pFJJ8rUmg7A u1oSTB5htbDgzcUnbO+7UgvpqiJS52V5fHxi3aP2MQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxgBeMjhSsPdx9BKElVJRCmYnUp0jzyKsk49exUnSkU3CFgl1JaZuvgtZgL/DydzqC1yrAV+4dabYmWVEgbfE4=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b016:: with SMTP id y22mr10943254ljk.133.1554566842404; Sat, 06 Apr 2019 09:07:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2019 09:07:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CACsn0c=rWPFu5Y-EkJCyqZG56nrniYM+kGmxrgTDkyaR3TBQ_g@mail.gmail.com>
To: NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006bd53b0585decc08"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/C3u09ry6Qk-O3ztyTvtn_fzjHJc>
Subject: [Ntp] No more options for NTP
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: Sat, 06 Apr 2019 16:07:27 -0000

Dear all,

This might be a terrible idea, but now that we have NTS-KE with protocol
negotiation I propose we use that for all capability negotiation to
encourage adoption of NTS and to avoid the issues with NTP extensions. Also
kill the MAC.

If we want a v5 I think that should be negotiated via NTS for flexibility.

Sincerely,
Watson

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email