Re: [ntpwg] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ntp-network-time-security-12.txt and draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-03.txt

[Danny Mayer <[e-mail]>]

On 12/23/2015 10:28 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
> So, the intention of the MAC extension field is to replace the current
> MAC field? And it will support the current pre-shared key authentication
> scheme?
> 

Yes. It will be close to the existing MAC but implemented as an
extension field. I'm hoping to get rid of the existing MAC in favor of
it as an extension field to give us the needed flexibility.

Danny

> Dieter
> 
> -------------------------------------
> Dr. Dieter Sibold
> Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt
> Q.42 - Serversysteme und Datenhaltung
> QM-Verantwortlicher der Stelle IT
> Bundesallee 100
> D-38116 Braunschweig
> Tel:    [phone]
> E-Mail: [e-mail]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Von:        Danny Mayer <[e-mail]>
> An:        [e-mail]
> Kopie:        [e-mail], ntpwg
> <ntpwg-bounces+dieter.sibold=[e-mail]>, Richard Welty
> <[e-mail]>
> Datum:        23.12.2015 15:45
> Betreff:        Re: [ntpwg] New Version Notification for
> draft-ietf-ntp-network-time-security-12.txt and
> draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-03.txt
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/23/2015 3:10 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
>> Danny, I understand your point. Yes the MAC extension field in 6.1.4.3
>> has to be described more clearly. But why should we need a special draft
>> for a MAC extension field. There is already the draft
>> "draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field" which should me general enough for
>> additional new extension fields.
>>
> 
> I know, I coauthored that draft with Tal Mizrahi. The problem is that a
> MAC extension field needs to be specified so that it can replace the
> existing MAC field. I'm also considering allowing for multiple MAC
> extension fields in a single packet so that one MAC hashing algorithm
> can be retired if found to be compromisable without disrupting NTP
> infrastructure and existing implementations. It also needs some
> discussion on usage by responding packets and which to use.
> 
> Danny
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
[e-mail]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg