Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for OSPFv2 HMAC-SHA Cryptographic Authentication - <draft-ietf-ospf-hmac-sha-04.txt>
From: Acee Lindem <[email-masked]>
To: John Smith <[email-masked]>
Cc: OSPF List <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:06:52 -0400
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>

Hi John,

Thanks for reviewing.

On May 17, 2009, at 7:55 PM, John Smith wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> Good to see this work finally moving forward. I strongly support  
> this once the following two issues are taken care of:
>
> (a) Draft cites HMAC-SHA-256, and not HMAC-SHA-1, as a MUST. Any  
> specific reasons?

HMAC-SHA-1 is "So 1997"... The authors reached agreement on a  
stronger common algorithm. Ran or one of the other authors may want  
to comment on HMAC-SHA-1 vulnerabilities as there was a lengthy  
discussion on which algorithm(s) to make a "MUST".

>
> (b) Although the document adds support for HMAC-SHA-224, i dont see  
> a value of B (section 3.3) defined for this.

This should be updated as follows:

                For SHA-1, SNA-224, and SHA-256: B == 64
                For SHA-384 and SHA-512:         B == 128

Thanks,
Acee

>
> John
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Acee Lindem <[email-masked]>
> To: OSPF List <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, 7 May, 2009 23:12:42
> Subject: [OSPF] OSPF WG Last Call for OSPFv2 HMAC-SHA Cryptographic  
> Authentication - <draft-ietf-ospf-hmac-sha-04.txt>
>
> The WG last call for the subject document will begin today and end  
> Friday, May 22nd at 12:00 AM PDT. Please review the document and  
> send your comments to this list. This version includes the Apad in  
> the HMAC calculation consistent with the discussions we had in  
> Philadelphia and SF.
>
> Thanks,
> Acee and Abhay_______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>
>
>
>