Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-msec-ipsec-group-counter-modes

Brian Weis <bew@cisco.com> Thu, 15 July 2010 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <bew@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F9103A6B41; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:33:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 78H1ntpsm5QC; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:33:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3FC43A6AD0; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAO/iPkyrRN+K/2dsb2JhbACfZHGkQJsJgneCLQSDfoRSiT0
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,209,1278288000"; d="scan'208";a="267717618"
Received: from sj-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.223.138]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Jul 2010 17:33:45 +0000
Received: from dhcp-128-107-163-140.cisco.com (dhcp-128-107-163-140.cisco.com [128.107.163.140]) by sj-core-4.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o6FHXjbA018046; Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:33:45 GMT
Message-Id: <0BD40125-37F4-42E7-84BE-F16E3241FD6D@cisco.com>
From: Brian Weis <bew@cisco.com>
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <tsliq4is2fl.fsf@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:33:44 -0700
References: <tsliq4is2fl.fsf@mit.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
Cc: draft-ietf-msec-ipsec-group-counter-modes@tools.ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-msec-ipsec-group-counter-modes
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:33:44 -0000

Hi Sam,

Thanks for your review.

On Jul 14, 2010, at 4:55 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:

>
>
> This is a secdir review of the above draft.
>
> The text looks fine. However, I'm concerned that this specification  
> does
> not provide sufficient detail for interoperable implementation.  It
> makes it clear that a GKMS needs to allocate SIDs but does not cite  
> any
> mechanism for a GKMS to do so.

>
> I think you need to either add a normative reference to a hopefully
> already existing description of how to distribute this parameter, or
> recast this document as an informational document describing a general
> method but not implementing a protocol.

There is an I-D for one GKMS (draft-ietf-msec-gdoi-update-06) that  
includes support for SIDs which could be referenced. It is expected to  
head to WGLC soon. Would citing that document address your concern?

Thanks,
Brian

> _______________________________________________
> secdir mailing list
> secdir@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir


-- 
Brian Weis
Security Standards and Technology, ARTG, Cisco Systems
Telephone: +1 408 526 4796
Email: bew@cisco.com