IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sidr] WGLC draft-sidr-rpki-rtr - take 2?

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Sat, 02 April 2011 09:08 UTC

Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A4CF3A6A6B for <sidr@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2011 02:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.56
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 nOYB7KCNIdzg for <sidr@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2011 02:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03B233A6A65 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2011 02:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dommiel.bbn.com ([192.1.122.15]:45282 helo=[172.30.28.142]) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.74 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1Q5wqM-0006Zh-Fd; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 05:10:06 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240802c9bc948bd98a@[130.129.20.213]>
In-Reply-To: <289DB32D-D175-49DE-AA82-100407F64C23@juniper.net>
References: <AANLkTimq3hcdK7-f_Pa9sWJJOTzF_GBLcYu36sB3WszN@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikfn_ZRQNQx0QLV7fJa8DDeqMa=yRqWUH4krMHD@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinV88U3cF6z51eNtPeF-xKG1aWVgALd06CPq4kE@mail.gmail.com> <m2d3l6cj2l.wl%randy@psg.com> <289DB32D-D175-49DE-AA82-100407F64C23@juniper.net>
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 04:54:50 -0400
To: John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: Christopher Morrow <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>, sidr wg list <sidr@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC draft-sidr-rpki-rtr - take 2?
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 09:08:28 -0000

At 6:32 AM -0700 4/1/11, John Scudder wrote:
>On Apr 1, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>  i propose that i rev the doc to say
>>   o the transport must provide authentication and integrity
>>   o the current ssh description is an example
>>   o other transport meeting the authentication and integrity constraints
>>     are welcome
>>
>>  of course, this will leave open the mandatory-to-implement LCD issue.
>>  sigh.
>
>I think we shouldn't punt on a mandatory transport.  I suggest 
>TCP-MD5 for practical reasons, including the open source support 
>issue Chris raised.
>
>--John

I expect TCP-MD5 to be deprecated (soon?), since we have already 
deprecated MD5. I don't think the IESG would approve of a reference 
to that RFC.

Steve

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email