[OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-security-extension-manual-keying-08

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Fri, 03 October 2014 19:52 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE1A11A1AAC for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 AfWPoPFJW6uO for <ospf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-x234.google.com (mail-yh0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AEE41A1A54 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 29so599616yhl.25 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 12:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=6xUEZnWRcf2jP3pY/gL2vL+PqVV0nh+AN/bZgc8iW8Y=; b=AeRrgp30LmjRf7KXHroBESRiRSWMkshfgzaB07QrkUv2moP3R9z1DaRXjZfpmKgyAo mpxkyDkvas27IEovI2ubTMOajkSK8TA7S0MMgW58TLziud17XeIMVJpkt/IysJ3LDeGV E4JMWK6ZC9zC8+hV7LCv9EaiBOqQAC/ewefPW5yZyoPLh3JgqX+qWHLsEtLmpF3s/Z+C d3tQ3LweC4KXCmztZHdDQOGB3hgHhUAKCcQAfnU6+Ytx0zY+6k3HcSQC0TPzQxsZNLnS MCJz+bpx6Atlul9rPH1zj3TaLK2NzohW3nd2iqxPiUXCTbGHS5yC6xRVzSvLN/4ifrTv 89Lg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.61.100 with SMTP id v64mr10614321yhc.77.1412365957740; Fri, 03 Oct 2014 12:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.113.134 with HTTP; Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:52:37 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1re30HP7ZneZh6Nt=tnU3im2oXBVj-zTxRTfsnota4VTtw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Ospf Chairs <ospf-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ospf-security-extension-manual-keying@tools.ietf.org, Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>, OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158be1c343c8d05048a1342
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/fgF8y9gZix9pTGJLfTZMdeMFK6Q
Subject: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-security-extension-manual-keying-08
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 19:52:39 -0000

As I do with all drafts that are ready to progress, I have done my AD
review of this
draft-ietf-ospf-security-extension-manual-keying-08.  In this case, I
apologize for it taking so long.

The draft is very clear and well-written.  I do have a few comments, but I
have sent it to IETF Last Call for review while we discuss.  Assuming that
goes smoothly and comments (including mine below) are taken into account, I
expect the draft to go to IESG telechat for Oct 30.

Major Comment:

My one concern is that in Section 3, it says:

"Additionally, the 64-bit sequence number is moved to the first 64-bits
following the OSPFv2 packet and is protected by the authentication digest."

but I do not see any other place where RFC 5709 is updated to include that
sequence number.  In Sec 3.3, RFC 5709 says:

   First-Hash = H(Ko XOR Ipad || (OSPFv2 Packet))


and I think it would be most excellent for this draft to clearly

update that to be (OSPFv2 Packet + Sequence Number).


Minor Comments:


Should the meta-data and header indicate that this updated RFC 5709?
It certainly looks like it.



Thanks for the hard work on a good draft to make routing more secure!


Alia