IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5925 (7135)

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Sun, 25 September 2022 18:23 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94443C1522AB for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Sep 2022 11:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.325
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.325 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WQH2G-JAQmNt for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Sep 2022 11:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-2.web-hosting.com (server217-2.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.98]) (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 E02D1C14F72B for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Sep 2022 11:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:Cc:Date:Message-Id:Subject:Mime-Version: From:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=2xNfirLrRsS4kdwA1ZzIf8r2DZTib6cGaMemQhcU89A=; b=I3Fdevo15S79CxujEUo8Pw/eTk 4WhuIUd5Y3ZpagM39zFr+4c/HfgPK6PdNHZ8Dqu3w03ikZsYMFiRtwBi2Y0OS/wqyMz8gSXrQ8gtq 12ExqmC5Yu252FcyxoZ/Poi8Pftk+EJbD9ur+CSAiR6jFMABOWKZTJaDJraqEpxlz2D8vZl0bctkR n9HtZLuBg7lnwflxEDBRCM8cAxY3X+hc/+27GnaH1+b6DAwnd37ni3H/gXh0JbsRv7nu+NrzAFdxq 1KEo63Fi3FqoQKdrKzndyYqE8Yh7Oax8+y8rYHZJ1EUUKfu2x5eI31Yk9+KN6+ChkWYKkBAkmN5jT xP0OfPZA==;
Received: from cpe-172-114-237-88.socal.res.rr.com ([172.114.237.88]:49534 helo=smtpclient.apple) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1ocWHY-004siS-NR; Sun, 25 Sep 2022 14:23:17 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-EB3BAEDB-D1EC-407E-A36F-560F1CD8DC04"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Message-Id: <E7861A9F-D4F8-42AF-BCDF-677A12510B3C@strayalpha.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2022 11:23:04 -0700
Cc: "Natarajan, Venkatesh (HP-Networking)" <venkatesh.natarajan@hpe.com>, Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>, Zaheduzzaman Sarker <zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com>, Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@arista.com>, Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com>, Ron Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>, Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>, tcpm@ietf.org, Salam Noureddine <noureddine@arista.com>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
To: Leonard Crestez <cdleonard@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (19G82)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/BBm-0PCCsfNi-yTKfmF5vDD38Oc>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 25 Sep 2022 13:16:15 -0700
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5925 (7135)
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 25 Sep 2022 18:23:33 -0000

Hi Leonard,

> On Sep 25, 2022, at 8:03 AM, Leonard Crestez <cdleonard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Accepting signed segments which don't match an MKT is not sufficient for establishing an unsigned connection.

Agreed. It indicates acceptance by that side.

> The other side must also be configured to *accept unsigned replies* to its signed packets and no such flag seems to be required by the RFC.

That’s on OS issue, not a protocol one. It is decided by local configuration that does not need to be coordinated.

> It might also make sense to only accept mismatch on SYN segments because otherwise it would be possible for a TCP-AO connection to be interrupted by an unsigned RST.

Once a connection is established, that connnection’s stae determines what options are required. See sec 7.5:

>> Note that TCP-AO checks MUST be performed for all incoming SYNs to
   avoid accepting SYNs lacking TCP-AO where required.  Other segments
   can cache whether TCP-AO is needed in the TCB.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email