[RPSEC] Cryptographic Algorithm Implementation Requirements for Routing Protocols
"Bhatia, Manav \(Manav\)" <manav@alcatel-lucent.com> Tue, 26 February 2008 17:03 UTC
Return-Path: <rpsec-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rpsec-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rpsec-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCB3B28C6CB; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:03:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.583
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.146, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 lNG2qNCe1-um; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:03:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07C8F28C6FD; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:03:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: rpsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rpsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BF6B28C4BE for <rpsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:03:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
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 NbXkmB+AjrUC for <rpsec@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:03:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail2.lucent.com (ihemail2.lucent.com [135.245.0.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 410F13A6B86 for <rpsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:03:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ilexp02.ndc.lucent.com (h135-3-39-2.lucent.com [135.3.39.2]) by ihemail2.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id m1QH2wqZ012364 for <rpsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:03:10 -0600 (CST)
Received: from inexp01.in.lucent.com ([135.254.223.65]) by ilexp02.ndc.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:02:43 -0600
Received: from INEXC1U01.in.lucent.com ([135.254.223.20]) by inexp01.in.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:32:22 +0530
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:32:18 +0530
Message-ID: <6D26D1FE43A66F439F8109CDD4241965012E982D@INEXC1U01.in.lucent.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Cryptographic Algorithm Implementation Requirements for Routing Protocols
Thread-Index: Ach4mVhg6tdfZVU4S+u5bOSfbDZSqw==
From: "Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" <manav@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: rpsec@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2008 17:02:22.0412 (UTC) FILETIME=[5A8600C0:01C87899]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.35
Subject: [RPSEC] Cryptographic Algorithm Implementation Requirements for Routing Protocols
X-BeenThere: rpsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Protocol Security Requirements <rpsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>, <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/rpsec>
List-Post: <mailto:rpsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec>, <mailto:rpsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: rpsec-bounces@ietf.org
Hi,
Our earlier drafts on OSPF/IS-IS cryptographic algorithms implementation
requirements were discussed in the 67th and 68th IETFs. It was suggested
that we merge our OSPF and IS-IS drafts into one, include RIP, and
present the same in the RPSEC WG. This is the first version of the
merged draft.
Abstract:
The interior gateway routing protocols OSPFv2 [RFC2328], IS-IS [ISO]
[RFC1195] and RIP [RFC2453] currently define clear text and MD5
[RFC1321] algorithms for authenticating their protocol packets. There
have recently been documents adding support of the SHA family of hash
algorithms for authenticating routing protocol packets for RIP, IS-IS
and OSPF.
To ensure interoperability between disparate implementations, it is
imperative that we specify a set of mandatory-to-implement algorithms
thereby ensuring that there is at least one algorithm that all
implementations will have available. This document defines the current
set of mandatory-to-implement algorithms to be used for the
cryptographic authentication of these routing protocols as well as
specifying the algorithms that should be implemented because they may be
promoted to mandatory at some future time.
A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bhatia-manral-igp-crypto-requi
rements-00.txt
Regards,
Manav
_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec
- [RPSEC] Cryptographic Algorithm Implementation Re… Bhatia, Manav (Manav)
- Re: [RPSEC] Cryptographic Algorithm Implementatio… Vishwas Manral