Re: [ntpwg] Pending NTP WG Last Call on Autokey

Dave,

My proposal that I sent out quite a long time ago was to steal a bit 
from the length field and set it to 1 for the updated protocol so that 
the particulars of the autokey protocol remains private inside the 
header extension itself and keeps it outside the field type. That way 
the servers (including those of NIST, USNO, etc.) can continue to work 
with both versions (the old and the new). The old clients (servers) will 
continue to work. Taking away one bit from the length field reduces the 
maximum extension length from 65535 to 32767 which I don't think we will 
ever need or can use.

It's this lack of privacy of this data that causes interoperability 
problems between Autokey and Microsoft's MS-SNTP protocols, otherwise 
this issue would never have arisen.

Danny

David L. Mills wrote:
> Danny,
> 
> I hear no proposals about extension fields other than my last proposed 
> rewrite of that section. There really is no wiggle room other than 
> deprecating Autokey in its present form and reformatting the headers. I 
> am not opposed to that in principle, but others, specificlly USNO, have 
> not been heard from.
> 
> Dave
_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg