IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] status of TCP-MD5 after TCP-AO publication

David Borman <dab@weston.borman.com> Wed, 29 July 2009 11:26 UTC

Return-Path: <dab@weston.borman.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 188F53A67B4; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 VuKadfu7-KWd; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.wrs.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 590763A6F57; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ALA-MAIL03.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-mail03 [147.11.57.144]) by mail.wrs.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n6TBQE1M005718; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:26:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ala-mail06.corp.ad.wrs.com ([147.11.57.147]) by ALA-MAIL03.corp.ad.wrs.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:26:13 -0700
Received: from dhcp-53da.meeting.ietf.org ([147.11.233.48]) by ala-mail06.corp.ad.wrs.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:26:13 -0700
Message-Id: <498A59CE-C010-4FD5-9A00-29E3FE51DB8D@weston.borman.com>
From: David Borman <dab@weston.borman.com>
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <6BB76CFA-4134-4D3E-BE20-3A90A5111CBD@nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:26:10 +0200
References: <6BB76CFA-4134-4D3E-BE20-3A90A5111CBD@nokia.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jul 2009 11:26:14.0027 (UTC) FILETIME=[619EEDB0:01CA103F]
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, "iesg@ietf.org IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] status of TCP-MD5 after TCP-AO publication
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:26:13 -0000

On Jul 29, 2009, at 12:48 PM, Lars Eggert wrote:

> Hi,
>
> at the meeting, the question came up which status TCP-MD5 should  
> have after TCP-AO is published. Specifically, whether it should be  
> obsoleted by TCP-AO and/or if it should be reclassified as Historic.

1) TCP-AO should obsolete TCP-MD5.  That was the whole point of this  
exercise of creating TCP-AO.

2) Whether or not TCP-MD5 is moved to historic is a separate issue.   
If people are concerned about marking it historic at this point in  
time, then don't.  We can always come back in a year or two after TCP- 
AO has been deployed, and then mark TCP-MD5 historic.

As long as it is clear that TCP-AO obsoletes TCP-MD5, then I don't  
think it matters that much if/when TCP-MD5 is moved to historic.

			-David Borman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email