IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sidr] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-sidr-publication-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Rob Austein <sra@hactrn.net> Tue, 31 January 2017 01:46 UTC

Return-Path: <sra@hactrn.net>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5458D12984F; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:46:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 htX4Ke39BjV3; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:46:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from adrilankha.hactrn.net (adrilankha.hactrn.net [IPv6:2001:418:1::19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66095129854; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:46:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from minas-ithil.hactrn.net (c-73-47-197-23.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [73.47.197.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "nargothrond.hactrn.net", Issuer "Grunchweather Associates" (not verified)) by adrilankha.hactrn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B43C1B869; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 01:46:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from minas-ithil.hactrn.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minas-ithil.hactrn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D38D46658D5; Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:46:09 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:46:09 -0500
From: Rob Austein <sra@hactrn.net>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <bda9ba71-6458-0b9e-f819-0713d95ffb5a@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <148478450463.2001.14196919509991761982.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170131005807.0669146654B0@minas-ithil.hactrn.net> <bda9ba71-6458-0b9e-f819-0713d95ffb5a@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20170131014609.8D38D46658D5@minas-ithil.hactrn.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/S1moeXJrOwQuxRPkhw5nW82w2PA>
Cc: Rob Austein <sra@hactrn.net>, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>, sidr-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, sidr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-sidr-publication@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sidr] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-sidr-publication-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 01:46:48 -0000

At Tue, 31 Jan 2017 01:20:21 +0000, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> >> Why is sha-256 hardcoded?
> > 
> > Real answer: because it's hard-coded in RFC 6486 and we were trying to
> > use the same hashing algorithm for manifests, this, and RRDP
> > (draft-ietf-sidr-delta-protocol).
> 
> Hmm. I don't see sha-256 mentioned in 6486 never mind
> hardcoded. Is there some indirection I'm missing? (But this
> may be moot, see below.)

OK, strictly speaking it's not hard coded in 6486, it's a reference to
6485.  Works out to the same thing for practical purposes: sha-256
now, upgrade theoretically possible but likely to be somewhat painful.

> > I had been assuming that an algorithm change would be a protocol
> > version bump.  Given that the server is probably storing these hashes
> > in a database, changing the algorithm is probably a bit more involved
> > than just changing the bits on the wire.
> 
> WRT clearing the discuss, if the draft said that then I'd
> be happy to clear. (Meaning that I don't care how the spec
> achieves alg. agility so long as it does somehow.)

Will do, thanks.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email