Re: [secdir] secdir review of Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field-05.txt

Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com> Wed, 20 January 2016 16:28 UTC

Return-Path: <sean@sn3rd.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C5D31A90C5 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:28:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 EMOqhdq5H_Ak for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:28:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x231.google.com (mail-qk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::231]) (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 14B281A90BB for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:28:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id s68so4988017qkh.3 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:28:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sn3rd.com; s=google; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=glS3oRojr+SADHR1a3C89wxo4UpV2E5UObpHL+wkJKw=; b=gVWcqhm/pnTtg8hSJmZyW8miffQ1h7bFJfu0zl+65mtDRFt+u2xQb4UktGrOAun/HF Vn5h6jAFa/qsFQMck1F0Gi5TdJGv5TpJTNv7yxXLNuyXyagzh9AMWyyVsUS1q+Gi7g6p AgbjmffTU7JeUCVHrMOTR8rJyNtj5Dmo0nfIA=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=glS3oRojr+SADHR1a3C89wxo4UpV2E5UObpHL+wkJKw=; b=TYJ+UCafXlahN2y2yMDCwBLMn3XDtaeFXKa2hE4rda/CrBGbe5ycQiRxoqssw1N8Z9 0CCnoH4bOclXfnzeOpe2A0og9gCUB2cvlhE1NZJf6yhlDuCG6tEHTtdQOf7V2YGYyjnx z/rpxMZ6FDpjqtTshU1k3DMP1dSota3Eh6i5RBj5X8SGvBP6wHVrfIoyZblZx7het2Yw 0QRL2MKXOp/nGPC5rP+ZQw8IKj26nol+gtAYAwMFe+RAGhdhoEeJnz5HJUcdLnqptr38 sqXud7LU+rYQOVqkwTDhho6403puXv+luDUbND4f/UkuMQDhDa4Ckcq+X9wkOqTW8Rk2 IwnA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlFiaA2v/+cjbneHQ3/aIVkX8LNWuHbVSQOCNhtjCCKlXWF9VI3suVpRJ7/+RPerC/Rgui4JDlot2IySFEyY/6xJtvk/A==
X-Received: by 10.55.31.9 with SMTP id f9mr46746024qkf.5.1453307321230; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:28:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.0.112] ([96.231.217.211]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f66sm14629159qkb.5.2016.01.20.08.28.40 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:28:40 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
From: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>
In-Reply-To: <2205089A-4961-4582-824F-C21138775DC8@sn3rd.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:28:39 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <86BDAD7D-485D-497F-B76A-6069D449F0AD@sn3rd.com>
References: <20151101165448.18272.29225.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2205089A-4961-4582-824F-C21138775DC8@sn3rd.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field.all@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/MRN4U6jtvm8w0kRlSZiGPWWqdUE>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field-05.txt
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 16:28:43 -0000

Status: ready for launch

Version 6 introduced additional text for the security considerations section, which I like.

spt

> On Nov 02, 2015, at 03:52, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>; wrote:
> 
> This version addresses my main concerns.
> 
> Not sure what you’re going to do with this though, but I guess that another draft’s problem:
> 
>> On Sep 17, 2015, at 02:02, Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net>; wrote:
>> 
>> We probably need to update the dgest field in RFC5905 to make it clear
>> that it can have multiple lengths depending on the algorithm used. On
>> the other hand I would prefer to get rid of the MAC and turn it into an
>> extension field, assuming that the NTS/CMS scheme is not used. The
>> advantages of that is obvious especially as no guessing would be
>> required and we could specify the algorithm to use and you could have
>> multiple MAC extension fields that would cover different parts of the
>> packet.
> 
> spt