IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpinc] Review of draft-bittau-tcpinc-tcpeno-01

Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> Mon, 24 August 2015 14:32 UTC

Return-Path: <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3138C1A1AD0 for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 07:32:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 umnaHBwDqqgP for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 07:32:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x236.google.com (mail-wi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::236]) (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 BFA5E1A036E for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 07:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicne3 with SMTP id ne3so74146281wic.0 for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 07:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Plja5nfW8XD4Ymiyhd6bNk15ZVqTxnxslEghizRMTd8=; b=BxMTWBjXmvAl2ZXuGpeV7rlaK07YinPv+f6cn3MYfmH/Qf3RrpSgbjQHX0DyXiLUev cLkAuCE5YNCIylaX7WUBmAYA7svpx6ps3iMXtouYSOMTyUXsdpJPnqxxowawObBCl0jw Skb/srBIHC2d5+iE4NZpuu7jCJ6kjKF4/0fvFx9mrujQtVdXBvxExiZdB7XXmzjqJxy6 5EHKPvBN0VCd1N/nPL+fuQ3jVPBpCBWhgROu9WLmCEPh0QgXHoHMp6GScAWeehgbZdL8 /e6g82mUrgmPEZ9G690jZfThBMqROrLPSzcBDd8oCzTPyMItsOiwZwV2MhTLKRCP7R+F 2jRA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.209.167 with SMTP id mn7mr39599129wjc.64.1440426674422; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 07:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.132.11 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 07:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150824142948.GA23716@LK-Perkele-VII>
References: <87wpwmnenv.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0cnq9cZdkn=yp8-GJfXDGMP8r1sib3qrQQEQYhF25kYZPg@mail.gmail.com> <87twrpokpz.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0ck2PfKQ8pkDLiSmuLH+81s2GzsBnKYH7e=5ga5nSJvo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <87io85ofkl.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0cmna07KzCZme7pxRgCcAOJLXzup3KPJ+bRimL=n3mpPXg@mail.gmail.com> <87vbc5l8si.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0c=cLj2F6JyFX848D1TuDt0A=kT7UMm8ZPRRu-X6ow4oTQ@mail.gmail.com> <87d1ycizeo.fsf@ta.scs.stanford.edu> <CACsn0c=SRaUR9okBAXaKBZG0wZ12h7aarxPFf7LYCtcQfG-nJg@mail.gmail.com> <20150824142948.GA23716@LK-Perkele-VII>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 07:31:14 -0700
Message-ID: <CACsn0c=h8sqXqQG5NXp9sc5TPhddPMui7Un1DYW8O4uxgwixHw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
To: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpinc/FE-DZXH08Dcs9fE53PFSW_tYK0o>
Cc: tcpinc <tcpinc@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpinc] Review of draft-bittau-tcpinc-tcpeno-01
X-BeenThere: tcpinc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for adding encryption to TCP." <tcpinc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpinc/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpinc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 14:32:47 -0000

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Ilari Liusvaara
<ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 07:22:23AM -0700, Watson Ladd wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 6:33 AM, David Mazieres
>>
>> This is a misreading: I'm proposing that at any time there is only one
>> suite that everyone uses, and versioning is just for transitions.
>
> This becomes highly problematic when one needs to:
> - Support multiple security levels.
> - There isn't one technically (meaning, ignore legal constraints)
>   superrior algorithm.

In case of point 2, why is there a need to use multiple algorithms?

As far as point 1 goes, if you want data to only travel over one
security level, you cannot support two security levels.

>
>
> -Ilari



-- 
"Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains".
--Rousseau.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email