IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-24: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> Fri, 20 March 2020 04:47 UTC

Return-Path: <hmurray@megapathdsl.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 BE3F23A157D; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:47:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.036
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.036 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 kT2XbjLakmJO; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:47:45 -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 231503A157B; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:47:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC9DA40605C; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org>
cc: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, ntp-chairs@ietf.org, ntp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp@ietf.org, odonoghue@isoc.org, hmurray@megapathdsl.net
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
In-Reply-To: Message from Harlan Stenn <stenn@nwtime.org> of "Thu, 19 Mar 2020 06:23:09 PDT." <9d88d4cc-b891-0c59-0263-86ce3b0b9f4c@nwtime.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:47:43 -0700
Message-Id: <20200320044743.AC9DA40605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/gT4dqmZsc43PDi_Swez9cmzt5x8>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-24: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 04:47:47 -0000

stenn@nwtime.org said:
> The NTP Project has sent its plans for TCP/123 to the working group, to be
> used by "NTP TCP Services".  We intend this to be used for a variety of
> NTP-related TCP services.  That is a work in progress.  Otherwise, the NTP
> Project remains strongly opposed to using TCP/123 for NTS-KE because of <good
> reasons we have stated before to the WG, and I want to save everybody the
> drama so I won't go in to them now>. 

Your "good reasons" would carry more weight in my view if you would provide a 
reference to your ideas.

Google found 2 drafts from 2018.  The total useful content was 2 paragraphs 
with few details.  Maybe I didn't search for the right thing.  The first said 
TCP and STARTTLS.  The second said key exchange.  In my opinion, both have 
been superseded by NTS-KE.

Are there other ideas I didn't find?

I think it would be a good idea to move ntpq operations to a secure channel.  
NTS-KE uses ALPN.  Is there any reason not to take advantage of ALPN so we can 
share port 123 with future ideas?




-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email