IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TICTOC] Antw: Re: [Ntp] WGLC for draft-ietf-ntp-mac

Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com> Wed, 30 August 2017 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tictoc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0A94132386; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:49:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nAFBR6duCVzS; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:49:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E21AF1323B5; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:49:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml703-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DUK93719; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:49:40 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.33) by lhreml703-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.44) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 08:48:56 +0100
Received: from DGGEML507-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.7]) by DGGEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::74d9:c659:fbec:21fa%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Wed, 30 Aug 2017 15:48:40 +0800
From: Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com>
To: Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>, "ntp@ietf.org" <ntp@ietf.org>, "odonoghue@isoc.org" <odonoghue@isoc.org>
CC: "tictoc@ietf.org" <tictoc@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Antw: Re: [Ntp] WGLC for draft-ietf-ntp-mac
Thread-Index: AQHTEMt6dgTCyuPEXEODOT5Gsnqn3aKawq4AgAFXiwCAAIuc8A==
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:48:40 +0000
Message-ID: <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBB599FEF@dggeml507-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <CF57EAFE-31F0-4ADD-A209-1802DB6CA643@isoc.org> <3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBB599924@dggeml507-mbx.china.huawei.com> <59A66816020000A100027A91@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <59A66816020000A100027A91@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.74.202.215]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020203.59A66E15.004F, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.2.7, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: c26ea7528d0d4faaa80e7ab448b23255
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tictoc/veUnMuFwlRIojQXA3k46hOCLatY>
Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Antw: Re: [Ntp] WGLC for draft-ietf-ntp-mac
X-BeenThere: tictoc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Timing over IP Connection and Transfer of Clock BOF <tictoc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tictoc>, <mailto:tictoc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 07:49:51 -0000

Definitely, it works for me;)

Cheers,
Yuanlong

-----Original Message-----
From: Ulrich Windl [mailto:Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 3:24 PM
To: Jiangyuanlong; ntp@ietf.org; odonoghue@isoc.org
Cc: tictoc@ietf.org
Subject: Antw: Re: [Ntp] WGLC for draft-ietf-ntp-mac

>>> Jiangyuanlong <jiangyuanlong@huawei.com> schrieb am 29.08.2017 um 
>>> 08:06 in
Nachricht
<3B0A1BED22CAD649A1B3E97BE5DDD68BBB599924@dggeml507-mbx.china.huawei.com>:
> Hi, I support the publication of this draft, though I have several 
> suggestions for the texts:
> 
> 
> 1.       “If authentication is implemented, then AES-CMAC as specified in

> RFC
>         4493 [RFC4493] should be computed…” in Section 3.
> This is a requirement, so I think it should use “SHOULD” instead of 
> “should”.
> But if this AES-CMAC is the only authentication mechanism, it is 
> better to use “MUST”.
> 
> 
> 2.       “We recommend that the MAC key for NTP SHOULD be 128 bits long 
> AES-128 key…” in Section 3.
> To be more formal, maybe it can be rephrased into “It is RECOMMENDED 
> that

> the MAC key for NTP SHOULD be 128 bits long AES-128 key…”

Why not: "The MAC key for NTP SHOULD be a 128 bits long AES-128 key…"?

[...]

Regards,
Ulrich

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email