[secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-07

Chris Lonvick <lonvick.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 24 September 2016 14:37 UTC

Return-Path: <lonvick.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B6212BCF8; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:37:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IJRO_uUREL1h; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:37:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22c.google.com (mail-pa0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22c]) (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 7FE5612BCF6; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:37:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id oz2so48883728pac.2; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:37:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version; bh=XB15zBaMqIMfoqwFTb2/qwjdfLGMybQQWvjxY267Yuo=; b=U063NAaPjU5PJPq53V/t+5ZH0csEO77WXp/P6yHH1GRxE6smzELGPMbkgm+HB+s/CE jT2PGhnP2oxsQ4sXbylipm2127ocN4tu/3ZHU9YkGdLxI41g6+aVflwQUSrGmI4ZjS/5 Vwm9LVIlNdD8i4rOLt+vhUcdmK7A1f5ABJjB20YO9+kYWlPlo2i5soBwrUUxpFbAfVUP bzd+s0WGzHn1h9v5Pi9bpWktkKqeHJldudV+9Kl7F4ejNUXnWXNIOogcqm1a/ivTL2MX PEzayDrmspgPP5WdVsIarcMN33saV72gA1n2wQ6SSK/C3igQ8AgMrf06Ou9nLhC7q8Pa Zvew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version; bh=XB15zBaMqIMfoqwFTb2/qwjdfLGMybQQWvjxY267Yuo=; b=DhakXgthhOZHcBhaJnMzk1ldzFiJzkwK52DYHUIbPnOWOI7TIk4IpV87UPkASxBJIK Q4chYPFggzRAogiTmK3rPLk0JwBBsLrVOsxzmFb7gWD5Ci+uxH6vMWlG3AhE07a1YxXN yby7LlXJDN0U/Bsub+mFmYV7FtMU2eq+pikv/Zwo/MivwmV7D0uQkZ3DmqhIjDR0QYWG 7CFTBGfcYByjkEud3GWSnH8K8mH7ay2jIdH9I1fU+GkvEY3WhMHDM5TQGUVuKMShcJQ+ NMwj4u1BM5YQp3FZVq6SsU8zPTUPJj2BjFoRNzzOtlf53F9SDJDVgqnH03tS4LDFjBIy 1p3Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPDhlpNpxh9ewCcnMNHYhkkbznLGp5gEiiOlw+3dQqFVt/M1sExf2wO2MioxFMJkA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id rb5mr22115046pac.45.1474727866118; Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:37:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Chriss-Air.attlocal.net ([2602:306:838b:1c40:5831:d12a:dde3:e542]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id k80sm19159202pfk.27.2016. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:37:45 -0700 (PDT)
To: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lisp-crypto.all@etf.org
From: Chris Lonvick <lonvick.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57E68FB7.10408@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 09:37:43 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020206010006070807020704"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/FU55Y79Q7zuaIjAMUeS2hwb5B9Q>
Subject: [secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-07
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdir/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 14:37:49 -0000

Hi Dino, Brian, and All,

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. 
These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security 
area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these 
comments just like any other last call comments.

The document is acceptable for an Experimental RFC.

I don't follow LISP so I'm not sure if there is an actual mechanism for 
a device receiving a map request packet to decline an offered cipher 
suite. If there is, I didn't see it explained in the draft. You should 
address this in a future draft. This will be needed for when new cipher 
suites are added and a receiving device does not have the capability to 
handle the new cipher suite, or the case where an old cipher suite has 
been administratively disabled; like if it's been compromised and 
shouldn't be used. There are several ways to do this.

There are a few nits in the draft you may want to take care of. First, 
Section 6 talks about setting the R bit to 0.

    The 'R' bit is not used for this use-case of the Security Type LCAF
    but is reserved for [LISP-DDT 
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-07#ref-LISP-DDT>] security.  Therefore, the R bit is
    transmitted as 0 and ignored on receipt.

    The 'R' bit is not used for this use-case of the Security Type LCAF 
but is
    reserved for [LISP-DDT 
security. Therefore, the R bit SHOULD be transmitted
    as 0 and MUST be ignored on receipt.

A few other things I found:
s/Soon as an ETR or RTR/As soon as an ETR or RTR/
s/followed by key-id 2, an finally key-id 3/followed by key-id 2, and 
finally key-id 3/

Best regards,