IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com> Wed, 29 July 2009 11:02 UTC

Return-Path: <iljitsch@muada.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 8E9563A6FBE; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.173
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.173 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.426, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 jL3M0Sv+2zf3; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sequoia.muada.com (sequoia.muada.com [83.149.65.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5FE23A684C; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-55f3.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-55f3.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.85.243] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by sequoia.muada.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n6TB1m6b084814 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 13:01:49 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from iljitsch@muada.com)
Message-Id: <FB33B8FD-308B-4867-902E-131382969C35@muada.com>
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.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 13:02:06 +0200
References: <6BB76CFA-4134-4D3E-BE20-3A90A5111CBD@nokia.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
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 11:02:07 -0000

On 29 jul 2009, at 12:48, Lars Eggert wrote:

> 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.

First of all, I'd like to see some operational experience with TCP-AO.  
Don't throw away your old shoes until you know whether the new ones fit.

Second, it's not like TCP-MD5 isn't being used. As such, "historic"  
wouldn't apply. "Deprecated", maybe.

Third, why is it exactly that we can't simply move from MD5 to IPsec  
to protect BGP sessions??

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email