Re: [Roll] [Last-Call] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-09

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 22 March 2021 19:52 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48C513A0CC5; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:52:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 9feor6GsHvFT; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:52:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EB9F3A0CC4; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 12:52:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08339389A5; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:58:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id YOzDFnKDUEpa; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:58:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC21B389A2; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:58:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BFB675; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:52:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>, secdir@ietf.org, roll@ietf.org, draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl.all@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <161643127376.6337.10029863442550466574@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <161643127376.6337.10029863442550466574@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:52:46 -0400
Message-ID: <7446.1616442766@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/ayS4jciZjfoL19RveG41lOgT7cw>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [Last-Call] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-09
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 19:52:55 -0000

Tero Kivinen via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
    > This draft defines a new mode of operation to the allow peer to peer on demand
    > routing in low power and lossy networks. I have not enough knowledge of RPL to
    > really know how the new mode differs from the old methods. The security
    > considerations section points to the RFC6550, and then explains that if rogue
    > router has key it can do all kind of things.

I would agree that this might be inadequate.
ROLL did RFC7416, and that should probably be cited.

Given that these networks are *adhoc*, I think that some applicability should
be considered as to whether there are actually any useful security from L2
keys.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide