IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ntpwg] Autokey, Shared keys

Harlan Stenn <stenn@ntp.org> Thu, 23 June 2016 20:34 UTC

Return-Path: <ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4A712D7B6 for <ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham 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 V-aywIOpA0Qb for <ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:34:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F1D12D7C6 for <ntp-archives-ahFae6za@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538F386DB44 for <ntp-archives-ahFae6za@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:34:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Received: from stenn.ntp.org (stenn.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::30]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E84CB86DB05 for <ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:28:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [::1] (helo=stenn.ntp.org) by stenn.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.87 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <stenn@stenn.ntp.org>) id 1bGBCL-000Jfr-PE; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:26:01 +0000
From: Harlan Stenn <stenn@ntp.org>
To: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
In-reply-to: <20160623182601.C3BD9406057@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
References: <20160623182601.C3BD9406057@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> message dated "Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:26:01 -0700."
X-Mailer: MH-E 7.4.2; nmh 1.6; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 24)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 1.8)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:26:01 +0000
Message-Id: <E1bGBCL-000Jfr-PE@stenn.ntp.org>
Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey, Shared keys
X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol <ntpwg.lists.ntp.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ntp.org/options/ntpwg>, <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/ntpwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntpwg@lists.ntp.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg>, <mailto:ntpwg-request@lists.ntp.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org
Sender: ntpwg <ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org>

Hal Murray writes:
> 
> stenn@ntp.org said:
> > I'm gonna wave my hands again and say there's no real problem with legacy
> > MAC use, even with the proposed new EFs.  A legacy MAC MAY follow a LAST-EF
> > packet. 
> 
> I'm missing an important idea.  Why is it interesting to put a legacy MAC 
> after any new EF headers?
> 
> It seems like an unnecessary complication that will be a pain in the ass for 
> a long time.

We're going to have to live with legacy MAC for a very long time.

> If a packet wants a MAC, why not put it in a new EF?

One SHOULD do that.  I'm not sure that one MUST do that.

If we have to handle new EFs and a legacy MAC for even 1 case, then it
MUST work for that case.  If it MUST work for that one case, then
there's no clear reason it would not worlk for other cases.

H
_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email