Re: Comments on Optimizing BFD Authentication

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Mon, 02 April 2018 12:08 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F10A21275AB; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 05:08:55 -0700 (PDT)
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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 KnePizjHO65f; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 05:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
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 5A1B71205D3; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 05:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=13294; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1522670934; x=1523880534; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=FJtD0S5UnI0HNmterH/1FbqrJJa0T173wtiAJJg8p0g=; b=VpzjyjmkJkSU/SF2ZxNKOP6GEoIcsoHmhiVmv6zCDm1MGkpTXALS8a6f aO+AOWWs7pYVkGRruEhY6wXL5+wVF/yO8rB9y3mL9Otya/VJOQK5pUB5q dp6Bd6LtcJ5k9xZvIer7lTRo6qspN389qoFfasvnwxVogBnbJm2x+1TAu k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DaAAAMHcJa/5ldJa1cGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQcBAQEBAYJNdWFvKAqDUogAjQGBUyGBD4Zhhw6EZIF6C4UEAhqEFiE0GAECAQEBAQEBAmsohSQBAQEBAyNWEAIBCA4DAwECKAMCAgIfERQJCAIEAQ0FhClMAxWuS4IchwENgSyCK4dhghOBDCIMglaCT4JAFoJKMIIkAogIjwYsCAKLMIJ8gTCLB4cmgiqGBgIREwGBJAEcOIFScBVkAYIYCZBEb40TgRcBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,395,1517875200"; d="scan'208,217";a="157562992"
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; 02 Apr 2018 12:08:53 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (xch-rtp-013.cisco.com [64.101.220.153]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w32C8rGQ011972 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 2 Apr 2018 12:08:53 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-013.cisco.com (64.101.220.153) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 08:08:52 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Mon, 2 Apr 2018 08:08:52 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>, Ashesh Mishra <mishra.ashesh@gmail.com>
CC: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Comments on Optimizing BFD Authentication
Thread-Topic: Comments on Optimizing BFD Authentication
Thread-Index: AQHTxrXg3MGGV9JCBUmQ/g36/nPaQ6PsVQaAgADQ6oCAAENeAA==
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 12:08:52 +0000
Message-ID: <D08326D2-2515-4348-982A-159971BBE5E7@cisco.com>
References: <20180328165736.GD3126@pfrc.org> <CAHDNOD+F0YjUaFfqR20g1DZyqUBnf1ZOhF2BuA3Nb-vue8_oKA@mail.gmail.com> <C64CA0DF-2358-4291-B393-92E1BB89DA4F@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <C64CA0DF-2358-4291-B393-92E1BB89DA4F@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.200]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D08326D225154348982A159971BBE5E7ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/K9VelLLWFRodhSS2ftDcd29Y01I>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 12:08:56 -0000

Mahesh – I believe these should be done as augmentations since draft-ietf-bfd-yang-13 has already been submitted to the IESG for publication.
Thanks,
Acee

From: Rtg-bfd <rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, April 2, 2018 at 12:06 AM
To: Ashesh Mishra <mishra.ashesh@gmail.com>
Cc: "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Comments on Optimizing BFD Authentication




On Apr 1, 2018, at 8:40 AM, Ashesh Mishra <mishra.ashesh@gmail.com<mailto:mishra.ashesh@gmail.com>> wrote:



What are the yang model considerations?  (See prior point.)

[AM] I'll let Mahesh comment on this.

To support the optimized BFD authentication, we will need to change the BFD YANG model to add a ‘optimized’ authentication capability.

Following are some of the changes I anticipate

- The current model has a typedef for auth-type, but since a bit has not been assigned (it is a TBD), it will require an update to the typedef to include the new bit, when it is assigned after IANA approves it.

- The current YANG model only supports the meticulous mode of authentication in its grouping for auth-parms. Will need to make it a choice between meticulous and the ‘optimized’ mode.


Mahesh Jethanandani
mjethanandani@gmail.com<mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>