IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Quick review of WGLC for status change for draft‑ietf‑ntp‑update‑registries

Hal Murray <halmurray@sonic.net> Tue, 09 August 2022 11:07 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 D7841C15A737 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 04:07:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.609
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.609 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AZLf0aPmrH6Y for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 04:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50]) (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 8A20CC159486 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 04:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 107-137-68-211.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net (107-137-68-211.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [107.137.68.211]) (authenticated bits=0) by d.mail.sonic.net (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 279B7nSb030369 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 9 Aug 2022 04:07:49 -0700
Received: from hgm (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by 107-137-68-211.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B6EA28C1CA; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 04:07:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.9.0 11/07/2018 with nmh-1.7.1
To: Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
cc: "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>, Hal Murray <halmurray@sonic.net>
From: Hal Murray <halmurray@sonic.net>
In-Reply-To: Message from "Ulrich Windl" <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de> of "Tue, 09 Aug 2022 12:34:20 +0200." <62F2382C020000A10004C389@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2022 04:07:49 -0700
Message-Id: <20220809110749.4B6EA28C1CA@107-137-68-211.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net>
X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVa1vsrQGQWTUmyojZ7+Q3D9a498mtTytVXKypuPYXQleTpkgng+wrGc852kmu5cn/O//uwhLG2nWM4zI5/EyOGMa2Z8p6ZlFUY=
X-Sonic-ID: C;pvRogdMX7RG+Bp26mN2KUA== M;dsGUgdMX7RG+Bp26mN2KUA==
X-Sonic-Spam-Details: -1.5/5.0 by cerberusd
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/_has3U5KpDCZV_ebK3d_EyUvQ34>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Quick review of WGLC for status change for draft‑ietf‑ntp‑update‑registries
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <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: Tue, 09 Aug 2022 11:07:54 -0000

Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de said:
> Should the parsing of the packet really depend on knowing what hash algorithm
> a specific key ID uses? It's quite likely that a server receives packets with
> a key it does not know. 

I don't know what Autokey does/did.

For simple shared-key, there is nothing on the wire that needs to know what 
algorithm a particular key ID is using.  That's an agreement between client 
and server, made when they setup the shared key.  You can use anything you 
want as long as the other end agrees.

Yes, a server may get garbage, either unknown key ID or a known key ID that 
used the wrong algorithm or wrong key or was just plain garbage invented by 
some broken hardware or broken software.

-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email