Re: [Pals] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-pals-p2mp-pw-03: (with DISCUSS)

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Thu, 31 August 2017 12:03 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pals@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6AAA132D73; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 05:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 MilMk24FUkGs; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 05:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x242.google.com (mail-wr0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A9CC132D77; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 05:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x242.google.com with SMTP id j3so320777wrb.5; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 05:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=bthbLhvGkXSPuO18F8SaaIOx3c/fQRvjXhfkvK91+w0=; b=Z8/dmZZ4SXPjoRc5WLe6ykIHOkDun+Fg/X7VgtPbVE4S4yUYlgAU3iI7RRT5PA+6Vi E0pv8XUh0KuH9KIAVgBouHZPeE3mDsmNCGhHX8gXC3x6DI9AHTcCefosjq8UczvtlaDc p8sOcgp9QfPvs9RuNhWauc+1tOlIsv4xGk7TWxBjYuJhGiTWic6gon0oLfLkRzUZyd1H 0tOBBzqCjlpYYxLYFtJONX8VkByxDEgLHYsGkscHu5CSv8xrabnOQmzSEq/1SyJqBFAc soxz90BDFlVo6verZM5vPpFIQKekNHICvpy+AeDoo/SHbDaL5vDxjvuOXcM8TDt2sHO8 dNdQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=bthbLhvGkXSPuO18F8SaaIOx3c/fQRvjXhfkvK91+w0=; b=bP43sHEiF6g9Axcy+Lwc13/mffuRn6Llg28YIuMNPsi0pLMqgB20gvXwQesIGYKXDh eyeO3a1IGad9QTjIxIAPgA3FVylNW9pKugAWChTxJbK9FIoxwSuDi7/vwLd7yxPH3EJ3 u9k80YPYW/Cse7fRPMKkzK6taXVz9jLUcEr6Xi5yrkCMO+csZBJ6n/qZNjpj076aj43e vc3ZCaspyCDB3O+I3orOJK8y6bivtU4PijGR8D6HES8IIzlvkELLVZEAaS+E6F3DYfI4 fNAeO0HhPH1avcBY1XCGkWhrg8Ve6ip+DfJH/rGgL5nCdQWbrtyf7fyGzFci6VkU/4AW mJng==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5h41r+9OTIKqqXTyHdJwNqxTKe7a4MzSlbOSWrSAFY8sCdHktJ7 X0KDDqLq8sjLjHQeHro=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb6P9NDAg2xBfr+GGue+ZoqMghmfpZpRqkb52JarOA4Zm7JDw3d2wzi4aShiLXBIV2pg91dTIQ==
X-Received: by 10.223.155.18 with SMTP id b18mr2596789wrc.104.1504180981618; Thu, 31 Aug 2017 05:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.126] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b91sm2887657wrd.41.2017.08.31.05.03.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 31 Aug 2017 05:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
To: Kathleen Moriarty <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pals-p2mp-pw@ietf.org, pals-chairs@ietf.org, pals@ietf.org
References: <150412137722.21566.9884376358367891967.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <233ebf05-b663-2a78-e962-5edf2940e85f@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 13:02:57 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <150412137722.21566.9884376358367891967.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pals/5wy8ImVQNCzFz3jzIpgA40Xmx2w>
Subject: Re: [Pals] Kathleen Moriarty's Discuss on draft-ietf-pals-p2mp-pw-03: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: pals@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Pseudowire And LDP-enabled Services dicussion list." <pals.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pals>, <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pals/>
List-Post: <mailto:pals@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pals>, <mailto:pals-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 12:03:17 -0000


On 30/08/2017 20:29, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-pals-p2mp-pw-03: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pals-p2mp-pw/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I haven't sen a response to the SecDir review, so please point me to one if
> there has been a response.  I fully agree with Tero that MD5 is not adequate
> and hasn't been for some time.  What is the plan to rectify this and deprecate
> use of the TCP MD5 signature for LDP? RFC8077, says that LDP MD5 authentication
> key option as described in the section 2.9 of RFC5036 MUST be implemented.  I
> asked on my ballot for RFC8077 when a deprecation process would start in
> support of Stephen's abstain and would like an update on that process.
>
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/ga2pIVcGw9WEgBX5MXA9MCmSs_s
>
>
>
>

Hi Kathleen,

I have proposed some text that tells implementers and operators that MD5 
is inadequate and that they should be prepared for an upgraded default 
hash for LDP. I don't think we do any more at this stage.

I have just spoken to Loa, one of the MPLS chairs, and we have agreed to 
write a short draft within the next month to start the process of 
deprecating MD5 and selecting and standardizing a new default hash for 
LDP. We will discuss this draft with the MPLS WG via the MPLS list and 
at the next IETF.

Best Regards

Stewart