IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-mahesh-bfd-authentication

"Rajeev G Nair (rajeenai)" <rajeenai@cisco.com> Thu, 03 December 2015 22:16 UTC

Return-Path: <rajeenai@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E55591ACEBB; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:16:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 oKg8hXali2W5; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:16:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A67841ACEB4; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:16:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=975; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1449180988; x=1450390588; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=VxnOR/9sYP0p17+PZYSwn6beaIXVp/YXc/rtV515VX4=; b=KkWeQAsAZIirkftKEJjUBpubl0kqR+Pmfg9JZ1qQxGNZFxjU8/XYwENS MeaZgdCBvt5XlyWFpxRwypSggHxafFmoXAnbIIykxUYOk/sUDoNbapYzd n36o2Bw2FAz/yEygE0REAR4PM5rR/oA/G8Albx27ls1QrRLqGB8GPOFiP M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AiBQCHvWBW/5ldJa1egzqBR783hg4CgU47EQEBAQEBAQGBCoQ1AQEEeRACAQgOODIlAgQOJIgPAcIUAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARqGVIR9iTsBBI1iiH8BjTuBW4RDiTmNFQE3LIQEhVoBgQYBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,378,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="52441956"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Dec 2015 22:16:27 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (xch-aln-001.cisco.com [173.36.7.11]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tB3MGRJA029055 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 22:16:27 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com (173.36.7.12) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 16:16:26 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) by XCH-ALN-002.cisco.com ([173.36.7.12]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 16:16:27 -0600
From: "Rajeev G Nair (rajeenai)" <rajeenai@cisco.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Subject: Re: Request for WG adoption of draft-mahesh-bfd-authentication
Thread-Topic: Request for WG adoption of draft-mahesh-bfd-authentication
Thread-Index: AQHRI4t1BhxwWi4DrkqzzQbDKMhgLp6sDquAgAFeBgCAAEMzgIAJYrIAgAK1QgA=
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 22:16:27 +0000
Message-ID: <D285FC8A.109323%rajeenai@cisco.com>
References: <D2747638.109021%rrahman@cisco.com> <D27A74CD.10520C%rajeenai@cisco.com> <ED7433C2-8198-4D82-87BF-4F4FEA94080A@gmail.com> <D27BD707.106066%rajeenai@cisco.com> <20151201205502.GD22376@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20151201205502.GD22376@pfrc.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.2.150604
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [171.70.233.149]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <03DF8671B825CE4AB8E0CCF8C44619F3@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/E9pXoqSWkOWkaPTiCx8xDv05qrw>
Cc: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>, "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, "draft-mahesh-bfd-authentication@ietf.org" <draft-mahesh-bfd-authentication@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-bfd/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 22:16:30 -0000

Jeff

 Pls find in lined

>
>No particular offense to you or others on this point, but I must state
>something: I've always found the idea of the attack of keeping BFD *up* to
>be silly. :-)
>
>In general, BFD is used for fast-failover, but not on a stand-alone basis.

Rajeev> If authentication is compromised, fast-fail over won¹t happen,
right?. Any delay in fast-faill over will question BFD. BFD fail-overs are
as secure as the auth scheme used.

>
>Please recall that one of the valid scenarios for authenticated BFD is
>non-meticulous authentication.  In those scenarios, the same attacks are
>possible.  Meticulous authentication is intended to address this, but as
>you
>note in the absence of the cryptographic operation on each packet it is
>possible to keep the session up.

Rajeev> I recommend, we call out this in draft. That this scheme doesn¹t
protect against attacks & fail-over times may be affected in case of an
attack.

>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email