IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Antw: [EXT] Re: NTPv5 draft

Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> Thu, 10 December 2020 11:07 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 DA7663A0C92 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:07:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.037
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.037 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP=0.001, 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 Fh80yY5_ir0E for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:07:03 -0800 (PST)
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 E2C803A0C90 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:07:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27C8140605C; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:06:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: kristof.teichel@ptb.de
cc: ntp@ietf.org, hmurray@megapathdsl.net
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
In-Reply-To: Message from kristof.teichel@ptb.de of "Thu, 10 Dec 2020 11:38:41 +0100." <OFE90AD9EF.CD8E14CE-ONC125863A.0036599D-C125863A.003A796E@ptb.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 03:06:59 -0800
Message-Id: <20201210110659.27C8140605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/x9pgpkANL9q0I7t5Enzr9gDQIwY>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Antwort: Antw: [EXT] Re: NTPv5 draft
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: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 11:07:05 -0000

kristof.teichel@ptb.de said:
> I do not agree with the train of thought that because some users don't
> strictly need security for their use case, security should be disabled by
> default.

I don't think "default" makes sense when describing the protocol.  If the 
server supports it, the client can choose to use it or not.

"Default" would make sense if you are discussing a client option and/or the 
default configuration that is shipped by distros.

There is an ongoing discussion as to whether the protocol should require 
authentication with strong opinions on both sides.  I wouldn't use "default" 
there either.
 

-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email