Re: [TICTOC] Problem statement

"Pietilainen, Antti (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <antti.pietilainen@nsn.com> Mon, 04 August 2008 11:51 UTC

Return-Path: <tictoc-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tictoc-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tictoc-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C77928C1AB; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 04:51:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: tictoc@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tictoc@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC0543A6A6D for <tictoc@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 04:51:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 blF1MK0BE5cB for <tictoc@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 04:51:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (demumfd001.nsn-inter.net [217.115.75.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8526028C1A5 for <tictoc@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 04:51:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd001.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m74BpmOL009711 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 4 Aug 2008 13:51:48 +0200
Received: from demuexc022.nsn-intra.net (webmail.nsn-intra.net [10.150.128.35]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m74Bplk8025734; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 13:51:47 +0200
Received: from demuexc025.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.32.12]) by demuexc022.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 4 Aug 2008 13:51:47 +0200
Received: from FIESEXC014.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.0.23]) by demuexc025.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 4 Aug 2008 13:51:46 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:54:15 +0300
Message-ID: <B5535400D800AE498532700125ACF3DF3C12B1@FIESEXC014.nsn-intra.net>
In-Reply-To: <424CDC689E5CEF4D9FEADE56A378D9221C7280A5@exrad4.ad.rad.co.il>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [TICTOC] Problem statement
Thread-Index: AcjyLjKUI9Aak8iLTOqFziYWJSs39AAANlegAACX2BAAAK/ngAAF9DcQAPWdCOA=
References: <B5535400D800AE498532700125ACF3DF387403@FIESEXC014.nsn-intra.net> <424CDC689E5CEF4D9FEADE56A378D9221C7280A5@exrad4.ad.rad.co.il>
From: "Pietilainen, Antti (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <antti.pietilainen@nsn.com>
To: ext Yaakov Stein <yaakov_s@rad.com>, ext Doug Arnold <darnold@symmetricom.com>, ext Danny Mayer <mayer@ntp.org>, tictoc@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Aug 2008 11:51:46.0971 (UTC) FILETIME=[79075EB0:01C8F628]
Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Problem statement
X-BeenThere: tictoc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock BOF <tictoc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/tictoc>
List-Post: <mailto:tictoc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1077026648=="
Sender: tictoc-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tictoc-bounces@ietf.org

Yaakov,
I did a search on draft-ietf-ntp-autokey-03 with the terms below but
could not find any. Maybe the wording is wrong or just different in the
Paris meeting minutes? Do you know the right wording? The document is 52
pages long and I don't know what wording I should be seeking for. 
Best regards, Antti


________________________________

	From: ext Yaakov Stein [mailto:yaakov_s@rad.com] 
	Sent: 30 July, 2008 17:22
	To: Pietilainen, Antti (NSN - FI/Espoo); ext Doug Arnold; ext
Danny Mayer; tictoc@ietf.org
	Subject: RE: [TICTOC] Problem statement
	
	
	 
	By the way, "zero-knowledge proof of time", "breaking the loop
of authentication requiring time", and "time requiring authentication"
are all new terms. At least I did not find any hits in Google except the
two to the tictoc minutes from Paris. There must be some references that
describe these problems. Could you provide a pointer to a reference (or
pointers) for the group so that the validity of the terms could be
reviewed?
	 
	 
	Have a look at the autokey draft - you have until Friday to
provide LC comments.
	 
	In any case, these are NOT new terms. They have been around
since the original Autokey.
	 
	Y(J)S

_______________________________________________
TICTOC mailing list
TICTOC@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc