Re: [OSPF] New Version Notification for draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis-01.txt

Thank Michael - Does anyone else support this work? I think it will help
ensure compatibility between implementations. I would have expected at
least those who submitted the corrected errata to support the draft.
Thanks,
Acee

On 6/6/13 1:12 PM, "Michael Barnes" <mjbarnes@cisco.com> wrote:

>I agree these are good changes. Acee, please move forward with this draft.
>
>Thanks,
>Michael
>
>On 05/09/2013 11:03 AM, Acee Lindem wrote:
>> There have been a couple errata filed on RFC 6505 (authors copied). As
>>a service to the
>> OSPF community and in an effort to ensure interoperable OSPFv3
>>authentication
>> trailer implementations, I have produced a BIS draft. The changes are
>>listed in
>> section 1.2:
>>
>> 1.2.  Summary of Changes from RFC 6506
>>
>>     This document includes the following changes from RFC 6506
>>[RFC6506]:
>>
>>     1.  Sections 2.2 and 4.2 explicitly state the Link-Local Signalling
>>         (LLS) block checksum calculation is omitted when an OSPFv3
>>         authentication is used.  The LLS block is included in the
>>         authentication digest calculation and computation of a checksum
>>         is unneccessary.  Clarification of this issue was raised in an
>>         errata.
>>
>>     2.  Section 4.5 includes a correction to the key preparation to use
>>         the protocol specific key (Ks) rather than the key (K) as the
>>         initial key (Ko).  This problem was also raised in an errata.
>>
>>     3.  Section 4.5 also includes a discussion of the choice of key
>>         length to be the hash length (L) rather than the block size (B).
>>         The discussion of this choice was included to clarify an issue
>>         raised in a rejected errata.
>>
>>     4.  Section 4.1 indicates that sequence number checking is dependent
>>         on OSPFv3 packet type in order to account for packet
>>         prioritization as specified in [RFC4222].  This was an omission
>>         from RFC 6506.
>>
>>
>> I would like to quickly move this to an OSPF WG document and begin the
>>review process. I'm now soliciting feedback on OSPF WG adoption.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Acee
>>
>>
>> On May 9, 2013, at 1:43 PM, <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
>>   wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis-01.txt
>>> has been successfully submitted by Manav Bhatia and posted to the
>>> IETF repository.
>>>
>>> Filename:	 draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis
>>> Revision:	 01
>>> Title:		 Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3
>>> Creation date:	 2013-05-09
>>> Group:		 Individual Submission
>>> Number of pages: 25
>>> URL:           
>>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis-01.txt
>>> Status:        
>>>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis
>>> Htmlized:      
>>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis-01
>>> Diff:          
>>>http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-acee-ospf-rfc6506bis-01
>>>
>>> Abstract:
>>>    Currently, OSPF for IPv6 (OSPFv3) uses IPsec as the only mechanism
>>>    for authenticating protocol packets.  This behavior is different
>>>from
>>>    authentication mechanisms present in other routing protocols
>>>(OSPFv2,
>>>    Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS), RIP, and Routing
>>>    Information Protocol Next Generation (RIPng)).  In some
>>>environments,
>>>    it has been found that IPsec is difficult to configure and maintain
>>>    and thus cannot be used.  This document defines an alternative
>>>    mechanism to authenticate OSPFv3 protocol packets so that OSPFv3
>>>does
>>>    not only depend upon IPsec for authentication.  This document
>>>    obsoletes RFC 6506.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The IETF Secretariat
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OSPF mailing list
>> OSPF@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>>
>_______________________________________________
>OSPF mailing list
>OSPF@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf