Re: [tcpm] TCP-AO: Text for New_Key Process

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Tue, 03 February 2009 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tcpm-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tcpm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 236D83A6C3A; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:57:42 -0800 (PST)
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 C8A663A6B99 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:57:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 7-NwuncRa2Ns for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:57:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5B843A6407 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:57:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [128.9.168.63] (bet.isi.edu [128.9.168.63]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n13Gv4UO024298; Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:57:06 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <49887760.4030407@isi.edu>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 08:57:04 -0800
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
References: <7.1.0.9.2.20081219010400.02bfd3d8@gmail.com> <496d9941.18038e0a.5558.ffffd3a6@mx.google.com> <497F7DDC.70309@isi.edu> <20090128162756.3799450822@romeo.rtfm.com> <B33C7F84-66B7-4F2C-9B04-2BC1716C7994@cisco.com> <498618DA.1070308@isi.edu> <20090202162602.D178450822@romeo.rtfm.com> <1233596612.498730c436efe@webmail.isi.edu> <20090203041052.83BCF50822@romeo.rtfm.com> <4987D110.7020804@isi.edu> <20090203152834.712B350822@romeo.rtfm.com> <4988722D.9070104@isi.edu> <20090203170910.69A7E50822@romeo.rtfm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090203170910.69A7E50822@romeo.rtfm.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com>, skonduru@juniper.net
Subject: Re: [tcpm] TCP-AO: Text for New_Key Process
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: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Eric Rescorla wrote:
> At Tue, 03 Feb 2009 08:34:53 -0800,
>> OK, let's call the place where the connection info is stored the STORE.
>>
>> Then the steps still become:
>>
>> - - get the keyID from the packet
>> - - go to the STORE to find out how long the MAC is
>> - - pass the keyID and (optionstart + len - maclen)
>>
>> Still three steps, vs one:
>>
>> - - pass the keyID and (optionstart + 2)
>>
>> Note that the second way doesn't need to go to a separate table of
>> information to figure out how to finish parsing the packet. Regardless
>> of what you call it or where you put it, this takes multiple steps and
>> consulting the STORE before you can pass the required information to the
>> verification algorithm.
> 
> Again, I wouldn't construct the system this way.
> 
> Rather, you hang the information required to process each connection
> off the connection itself. This is how pretty much every SSL/TLS stack
> works.

I don't think you're seeing the extra work; you're focusing too much on
the assumption that the STORE is in a single place. OK, so let's call
the place where the properties of a connection are in TCB++ (note that
the TSAD isn't the place you go for every packet; you can easily keep
connection info in the TCB++, and an implementation probably will, and
we already note that in the ID).

So the steps are still:

- - get the keyID from the packet
- - check the TCB++ to figure out where the MAC is
- - pass the keyID and (optionstart + len - maclen) to the algorithm

The point is that you can't parse the option without extra info that is
stored elsewhere - i.e., not in the packet. Whether it's central or in
the TCB++ is not the point.

Joe
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJiHdgE5f5cImnZrsRAk8PAKDA6J8OtgqXpT6WnbkdaIKeXj9ekQCgknga
9zMe2UlePTHVanf/xm5ZtdI=
=iIWp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm