Re: [Ntp] NTP Extensions (was Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-22.txt> (Network Time Security for the Network Time Protocol) to Proposed Standard)

Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org> Wed, 19 February 2020 21:33 UTC

Return-Path: <stenn@nwtime.org>
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 0ED0B120837 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:33:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 pWCtWoAJPj3a for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:33:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from chessie.everett.org (chessie.everett.org [66.220.13.234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B7D3120128 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:33:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.208.75.157] (75-139-194-196.dhcp.knwc.wa.charter.com [75.139.194.196]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48N9vT5NvCzL7Y; Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:33:41 +0000 (UTC)
To: ntp@ietf.org
References: <20200219084813.E4C6840605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> <F9A58B4B-25A7-4652-8963-6849DE359C5A@kaloom.com> <1582136379878.71291@akamai.com>
From: Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
Autocrypt: addr=stenn@nwtime.org; keydata= mQGNBFI2xmQBDACrPayw18eU4pIwCvKh7k0iMkAV9cvzs49kBppM+xoH+KKj4QWmkKELD39H ngQnT3RkKsTLlwxyLqPdUmeQNAY2M5fsOK+OF6EvwLPK9hbmE3Wx2moX+sbEUxJ2VzFhKSKb OPZALXwk1XxL0qBedz0xHYcDwaSAZZkEFXURv2pDIdrmnoUnq2gdC8GpoFJiXoUaCLSYzzaY ac4Njw7Mue8IqfzRQb70aMjXl/qmsmfmEVAyGXywDdc/ler4XSgiuYOV7Kf69bj9PFZZSMdJ MWgEyZH6lJ0TU5ccR2zp5ZRmWzQQkxJMyH2th7q0Nmz3aX4A0K4yE0Ba9/5Dr7ctpF15BrMF aEo4s5lwI6tUnkgMWo265mMzCz4mAPV/ac0w0OXQg7r9E2r0+dRapnzUlG43D0JLDqDr9uRR L6IrRQqoCWUC75lfmPYQYSlaTJaK68r3lXd0z1cXJUgVtEL5H3/Z71R2B20twcQVAnw2iIH6 L5vdrsIjHrMmkqRVbs9nNyEAEQEAAbQ5SGFybGFuIFN0ZW5uIChOZXR3b3JrIFRpbWUgRm91 bmRhdGlvbikgPHN0ZW5uQG53dGltZS5vcmc+iQG5BBMBAgAjBQJSNsblAhsvBwsJCAcDAgEG FQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQyIwAt1pH+kBlzgv/QOg70vdj8wU/z97UPdlbxtN4THAB gfSX4N0VPKT5fjX1tFhuXZQAOv7wedR3Trh7TGteyg33TBAFf9A42mXZKi1IxAiQG118Hd8I 51rXwnugURIYQaIyQI+vbchRbwVyz+mVLTI/h6FdbsVzT4UFmir+ZMkb/XeZPu0HItk4OZHE 6hk+TuTiCnlqlCPLq371fXV54VOb91WZYD8EQFtK02QHGHsQqWvapdphiDVpYehmsPyiTESq NMKLVtjtyPkQ6S7QF3slSg+2q3j8lyxEA78Yl0MSFNU8B/BtKgzWP2itBOfi+rtUKg+jOY1V /s2uVk2kq2QmHJ/s5k5ldy3qVvoTpxvwBe0+EoBocTHYt+xxp0mTM6YY1xLiQpLznzluqg9z qtejX1gZOF4mgLiBIrhXzed3zsAazhTp5rNb1kn0brZFh6JC5Wk941eilnA4LqX8AWo0lmwo eb+mpwZK/5lNdage/anpVqft9wJ/8EcvST9TLUO4fPrmT3d/0LpWuQGNBFI2xmQBDADXLsBk I7CSa5UXlrNVFJQHER1VxRBKqjWWCh/8Qv9v3p3NrIc2UnhoZ1uWQ2voBGty5Xfy9k4afV5k WwDyRDUIb7PX+Tj4HjVVr7qvnOVe/0KzZpNq0Azd0ggFbsM+8mydktHIwJykW0NUsGwPRYuD OA0Lro0ohb5IiCt3sSQi1X1hYjo7O1Vmn8Gy/XYOnhnMux+5zDPO2yTkCNX5PocYi9IJJy6p Mq1yQV4Y2Dl8KtQzvtq55vCUxx6n0MMzFViGwNW6F4ge9ItO4tDScsgowDrHa208ehwOpv/i wjf93lCClQ6vaKmOBX872K/tdY/hwhxPPjgl1bcrOwMRYVemOPPehwnXH5bwclk1hvDQdkJQ 5pJOkE4VCryTF/iDAt4g2QnHocUwt3b6/ChUUWmj2GZ22OR12rbnCtLedwp0DpViKPUCQHBO vpgXdzE/L9zWar9fqM0EREMgfWbsJc9028qluCcFLIN1gYsq4cC+YGAcOu7HOI5orBBV4m9j XfsAEQEAAYkDPgQYAQIACQUCUjbGZAIbLgGpCRDIjAC3Wkf6QMDdIAQZAQIABgUCUjbGZAAK CRDfCQ/G52/8P/uWDACe7OEM+VETDRqjQgAwzX+RjCVPvtgrqc1SExS0fV7i1mUUxr/B8io3 Y1cRHFoFKmedxf8prHZq316Md5u4egjFdTT6ZqEqkK0hvv+i0pRpCa5EX9VIStcJStomZp8F cY34grA+EOWITaLQ4qNZUP7rf2e7gq1ubQTj7uLr6HZZvMZ5em+IvrOWEuWDI6yOiI6px04w RDfkoR2h6kgdw4V0PT4NjK9WYYKrVCf1bjLlVImNBEcXfvlUTrIYO8y6ptvoUsBQky5pQRvP 99Pn42WfyLy50aII6+vyudD4T0yLjXAz4KteUttxtIte64m/F9/7GEIZAxTUcLyOq/7bP4le h39jBckwc62iYzeK/VkU/bMMh2D68Z3QylMnhhcW27BcgQHPKsHhmFa2SNytYcuQiSdf9+pj 4i32ETz1nJAvYAAqgTF/0PL+8ZNQoEpe/n9woMKrlZrqD4EgFmhQ3bNVhlaXz1nuTZDrwPt1 yMxBuUNbCF4jFnaruwrSiGTRoIfUZQwAjQglahrV4/mcjfnvbNoseHX0PKd9q+wjg7MIjWqr f2CI8Fa6MdanqwYphz43I2yXANKFZuMWsWqyQYlvGuPUlUUcAL3stp24RkzDB1Q+JS0IZJST T2JSu0aTfUdWVNqr2UI19eX+zxbOTckSi3Ng14ezG8ZX194ZH10b8JzntQOwmA20pd5JDhug zQfASER+CZDiPPcQ4mvC4y7rMrfV6XGQbDynC3ekDxo8SC5SvjaczXMwXg6SZ8iFtEWmEwW9 r7zPjjIPDrX8w5LXBgxArM5o/HbERpc2EdAvMh1D7LC0SvmoE7fBKxsicVBe4h6vXjEZ+LLr /wuZiBld9OnxAUIpwptbBspO6WKTQYvgFH2OeDG27hiE5P4Xs4WSp5j9ez8OVB1iZnA2nCQ+ tNTjO8c+C/P92vPLx5+bpGRXTXMNaLh34PS3ZsYoUDkKZNhczRZUWJ7nynSbeeyF+QW7SLwA qY7O7dyk9LFTsfJqRQJ7tWnIAjJPCwmSgQ8Kl0UJ
Message-ID: <2acb8507-c0b5-a370-d6ab-564398ae9602@nwtime.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 13:33:39 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1582136379878.71291@akamai.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/HsQOigxnMcdT9KiH6XCW3uateho>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTP Extensions (was Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-22.txt> (Network Time Security for the Network Time Protocol) to Proposed Standard)
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: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 21:33:45 -0000

Except that we did discuss this, years ago, and there was a meeting with
me and Karen and I forget who else where we specifically said that
0xnn04 was already allocated for NTS.  I've long been saying we need a
way to make progress with EF proposals that does not cause collisions
between inplementations and avoids flag days.  Furthermore, I told Karen
that the NTP Project was using 0xNN0[5-9] for other proposals and that
with no progress on changing the way the NTP Extension Field IANA
registry was being managed, that 1) the NTP Project has a chalkboard
that we're using for this purpose, and 2) if anybody wants to work on an
EF they should just let me know.

You knew this too, and picked different numbers for your own reasons.

H

On 2/19/2020 10:19 AM, Franke, Daniel wrote:
> Suresh,
> 
> 
> Hal may not have been clear. The four extension fields we're discussing
> are the four defined by the NTS draft. Due to the registry's unfortunate
> lack of any P&E range, Hal and other implementers have picked four codes
> that they've been squatting on for their draft implementations. Desiring
> to avoid a flag day when the draft becomes final, they'd like IANA to
> turn these four codes into official allocations rather than having IANA
> arbitrarily assign something else. Speaking as an author of the draft I
> have no objection to this.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Suresh Krishnan <Suresh@kaloom.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2020 11:48
> *To:* Hal Murray
> *Cc:* Daniel Lublin; last-call@ietf.org; ntp@ietf.org; Karen O'Donoghue;
> draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp@ietf.org; ntp-chairs@ietf.org;
> IETF-Announce
> *Subject:* NTP Extensions (was Re: [Ntp] Last Call:
> <draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-22.txt> (Network Time Security for the
> Network Time Protocol) to Proposed Standard)
>  
> Hi Hal,
>   (Changed subject to match your question below)
> 
>> On Feb 19, 2020, at 3:48 AM, Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net
>> <mailto:hmurray@megapathdsl.net>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> daniel@lublin.se <mailto:daniel@lublin.se> said:
>>> I'm not entirely convinced of keeping a list of implementations in an
>>> RFC.
>>> But since the information is there, let's at least have it corrected and
>>> updated upon publishing.
>>
>> I thought it was a temporary section and would be deleted by the final
>> editing
>> pass when the TBDs were filled in.
>>
>> Traditionally, RFCs required running code, normally at least 2
>> independent
>> implementations that can talk to each other.  That section is useful
>> while
>> debugging and collects the data for the reviewers.
>>
>> -------
>>
>> Speaking of TBDs...  How do we contact the czar who assigns numbers
>> for NTP
>> extensions?  We've all been testing with 4 values.  It will be a pain
>> if they
>> change and I don't know of any reason not to make the values we are using
>> official.
> 
> If you are talking about NTP extension field types [0], they do require
> IETF review for allocation (i.e. no czar). Writing up a draft with your
> usage and sending it over to the ntp wg for consideration would be the
> best way forward.
> 
> [0] _https://www.iana.org/assignments/ntp-parameters/ntp-parameters.xhtml#ntp-parameters-3
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.iana.org_assignments_ntp-2Dparameters_ntp-2Dparameters.xhtml-23ntp-2Dparameters-2D3&d=DwMFAg&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=NlX0r6ynsvJy6t1-UbBqZbYxmdFYzvmLMmHofVndJ5k&m=4kCauNy5drgPVUEUsh2dWTBaaNAbwXU3tn1IZ2PbYI8&s=Ilafc9XVtUXj0DZFzrrma2AVM9yP4qsJLTGybPb_FaE&e=>_
> _
> _
> Regards
> Suresh
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ntp mailing list
> ntp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp
> 

-- 
Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member!