IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Feedback on draft-ssh-ext-info-00

denis bider <ietf-ssh3@denisbider.com> Mon, 14 December 2015 19:08 UTC

Return-Path: <bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DE81B2DB5 for <ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:08:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.29
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 6viU5iBs5dbo for <ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:08:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [199.233.217.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9681C1B2DB0 for <secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:08:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 2E09485EB4; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 19:07:59 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org
Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1347) id DC09D85EA1; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 19:07:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11AE985E2B for <ietf-ssh@netbsd.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 00:27:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at netbsd.org
Received: from mail.netbsd.org ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail.netbsd.org [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10025) with ESMTP id lGeDHz-TTNrA for <ietf-ssh@netbsd.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 00:27:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from skroderider.denisbider.com (skroderider.denisbider.com [50.18.172.175]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BDEF85E1E for <ietf-ssh@netbsd.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 00:27:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Footer: ZGVuaXNiaWRlci5jb20=
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by skroderider.denisbider.com for nisse@lysator.liu.se; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 00:27:44 +0000
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 00:27:44 +0000
Subject: Re: Feedback on draft-ssh-ext-info-00
X-User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/42.0
Message-ID: <420676586-2960@skroderider.denisbider.com>
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: denis bider <ietf-ssh3@denisbider.com>
To: Niels Möller <nisse@lysator.liu.se>, Matt Johnston <matt@ucc.asn.au>, Damien Miller <djm@mindrot.org>, Markus Friedl <mfriedl@gmail.com>
Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-impCIMnbHR/o7k0Ppmw+"
Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org
List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org
Precedence: list

This is what I would prefer also. However, as far as I've understood, it's not what Markus implemented for OpenSSH.

If Markus and Damien wanted to implement this - that both sides presenting ext-info-{s,c} should reliably lead to both sides sending SSH_MSG_EXT_INFO - then I would prefer to modify the draft this way.

However, it would be counter-productive to knowingly specify behavior different from this major implementation.


----- Original Message -----
From: Niels "Möller" 
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 02:14
To: Matt Johnston 
Cc: denis bider ; Damien Miller ; Markus Friedl ; ietf-ssh@netbsd.org 
Subject: Re: Feedback on draft-ssh-ext-info-00

Matt Johnston <matt@ucc.asn.au> writes:

> Why not keep just ext_info_{c,s} and specify that client and server
> both MUST send SSH_MSG_EXT_INFO immediately after SSH_NEWKEYS iff both
> sent ext_info_{c,s}? Then they both know what to expect.

Sounds ok to me.

Regards,
/Niels

-- 
Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26.
Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email