IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4552 (2599)

Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 03 November 2010 16:30 UTC

Return-Path: <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8726528C112 for <ospf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:30:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e3auh3RXVa-L for <ospf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DEC628C107 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:30:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qwb7 with SMTP id 7so203673qwb.31 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:30:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bt0i5EsU93XWIxhm8Foj9f7CoEYIbcZeTol4sLRBYaA=; b=kRBH6igM/FHLFNKZMZf5O8Qz+Nj5tSKWIKPKDFsZD0a5vrwj8op4I28dNvpt/jTf92 ARsdLUJLT/i3edwQhJX0LMEuhYbOjWySQgMIjGaxWPuLDZkW4ihdxKr87LEbobjxtGOV wAqNavmlPdLo8H0QucCYkpeLP9z9MzK1vUupY=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=skMgtyb1HzLCB6PMLgjng/abgbnlLdnVY/OHIZo6pnHF82eqXebA7dGrPIyriC0cqD kwmAJUCZobiHCTBNCW0bXz3IiXRNXXT8YIu1B/XdbuzANavuiWr3CFcQ+hWR0a//fYN3 w2cipOdwbt0OpyLcjnvpMLXfB5bvqHCSohMHI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.236.8 with SMTP id ki8mr12317804qcb.116.1288801844676; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:30:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.65.93 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:30:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <66BC910D-6839-4C94-967C-B614864ECAB6@ericsson.com>
References: <20101102155316.C350CE06B7@rfc-editor.org> <AANLkTi=2S_sngGZK3sQzdhCD9hOPnD5xkd989QkaAP6w@mail.gmail.com> <66BC910D-6839-4C94-967C-B614864ECAB6@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:30:44 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikPcX4mhrmvQP-w2+Cwhd_cC7L+h-cHEGjYGWMu@mail.gmail.com>
From: Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "acee@redback.com" <acee@redback.com>, "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>, "adrian.farrel@huawei.com" <adrian.farrel@huawei.com>, "mukesh.gupta@tropos.com" <mukesh.gupta@tropos.com>, "nmelam@juniper.net" <nmelam@juniper.net>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC4552 (2599)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:30:38 -0000

Hi Acee,

The reason IPsec mandates ESP as for most part ESP is a superset of AH
and the aim is to somehow not have 2 ways to do things when they can
be done with just one protocol.

Thanks,
Vishwas

On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com> wrote:
> Hi Vishwas,
> Do you recall the reason for making ESP mandatory and AH optional for OSPFv3 IPsec?
> Thanks,
> Acee
> On Nov 2, 2010, at 8:05 PM, Vishwas Manral wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This errata is wrong. ESP provides authentication as well as
>> confidentiality, have a look at RFC 4301.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vishwas
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 8:53 AM, RFC Errata System
>> <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC4552,
>>> "Authentication/Confidentiality for OSPFv3".
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> You may review the report below and at:
>>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4552&eid=2599
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Type: Technical
>>> Reported by: John W. O'Brien <john.w.obrien@lmco.com>
>>>
>>> Section: 3
>>>
>>> Original Text
>>> -------------
>>> In order to provide authentication to OSPFv3, implementations MUST support ESP and MAY support AH.
>>>
>>>
>>> Corrected Text
>>> --------------
>>> In order to provide authentication to OSPFv3, implementations MUST support AH and MAY support ESP.
>>>
>>> Notes
>>> -----
>>> Authentication can be provided by an implementation that supports AH only.
>>>
>>> Instructions:
>>> -------------
>>> This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
>>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
>>> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
>>> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> RFC4552 (draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-auth-08)
>>> --------------------------------------
>>> Title               : Authentication/Confidentiality for OSPFv3
>>> Publication Date    : June 2006
>>> Author(s)           : M. Gupta, N. Melam
>>> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
>>> Source              : Open Shortest Path First IGP
>>> Area                : Routing
>>> Stream              : IETF
>>> Verifying Party     : IESG
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email