From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 06:28:16 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80F4F21F8A58 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 06:28:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.018 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.581, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qImOukqf+Vz1 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 06:28:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44B6921F8A56 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 06:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6220B86D765 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:28:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD4586D41E for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp138.iad.emailsrvr.com ([207.97.245.138]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QmRwG-000H98-AZ for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:52:03 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp43.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 65A352D0211; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:51:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp43.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: odonoghue-AT-isoc.org) with ESMTPSA id 3B7E32D016A; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:51:46 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E317781.3010708@isoc.org> Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:51:45 -0400 From: Karen O'Donoghue Organization: ISOC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tictoc@ietf.org, NTP Working Group X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 207.97.245.138 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: odonoghue@isoc.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:24:45 +0000 Subject: [ntpwg] reminder and remote participation information for today's meeting X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: odonoghue@isoc.org List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Folks, As previously discussed, there will be a face to face meeting of the tictoc wg here at IETF 81. Note that I am cross-posting this to the ntp wg as well as there is related discussions there. For remote participation, there is an audio stream to listen and a jabber channel for submitting comments/questions. The easiest way to directly access the information is: http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/81/ General information is available at: http://www.ietf.org/meeting/81/remote-participation.html IETF-81 TICTOC WG Agenda ======================== Thursday, 28 July 2011, 1520-1720 EDT (1940 - 2140 UTC / 1220 - 1420 PDT) 1. Administrivia and Agenda Bashing 2. ITU-T SG15/Q13 update 3. IPsec security for packet based synchronization draft-xu-tictoc-ipsec-security-for-synchronization-01 4. Time Synchronization Protocol Security Requirements 5. Precision Time Protocol Version 2 (PTPv2) Management Information Base draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-00 6. Transporting PTP messages (1588) over MPLS Networks draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls-01 7. UDP Checksum Trailer in Timing Protocols draft-mizrahi-tictoc-checksum-trailer-00.txt 8. Network Time Mechanisms for Improving Computer Clock Accuracy draft-marlow-tictoc-computer-clock-accuracy-00 9. Additional NTP Discussion Topics 10. Wrap-up / Way Forward _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 13:17:04 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7931521F8686 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:17:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id USf93jmSMSwy for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:17:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A611921F867A for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:17:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B07D486D764 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 20:17:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23FEB86D75D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 20:15:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailfront1.rz.tu-bs.de ([134.169.12.132] helo=tu-bs.de) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoLNL-0000PL-RP for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 20:15:50 +0000 Received: from [84.133.197.241] (account y0034674@tu-braunschweig.de HELO [192.168.2.131]) by rz.tu-bs.de (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.13) with ESMTPA id 11579792 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:15:32 +0200 Message-ID: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:11:55 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110720 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: NTP Working Group X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 134.169.12.132 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: s.roettger@tu-bs.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Hello everyone, Since the discussion about the Autokey-Protocol in June ended abruptly, we want to inform you, that we finished our analysis of the protocol and found several weaknesses, that render it completely useless. Our analysis is in German, but if you are interested in it, we can summarize the weaknesses for you. In addition, we came up with some changes to the protocol, that mitigate the vulnerabilities and would like to present you a revised Autokey-protocol. The changes are: -Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). -Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-packet -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 Regards, Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 13:30:33 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EB4621F8841 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:30:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.776 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.776 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.923, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ySH378473ciZ for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:30:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7039821F8839 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:30:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B0C86DA59 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 20:30:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8840986D75D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 20:24:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail5.symmetricom.com ([69.25.98.10]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoLVT-0000qm-Qn for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 20:24:14 +0000 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1312316637-11aa97c20001-fmWeBm Received: from SJC-HUB-01.symmetricom.com ([192.168.10.171]) by mail5.symmetricom.com with ESMTP id KkhRmdCJXA8ljJMg; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:23:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: GDowd@symmetricom.com Received: from SJC-MBX-01.symmetricom.com ([169.254.1.52]) by SJC-HUB-01.symmetricom.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:23:57 -0700 From: Greg Dowd To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= Thread-Topic: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-ASG-Orig-Subj: RE: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis Thread-Index: AQHMUVEpx2DDqtbf30Ghrka+/ziIjZUKANsw Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 20:23:57 +0000 Message-ID: <26FBD265CD8D234EAF41115A180F92BB38AF02AC@SJC-MBX-01.symmetricom.com> References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> In-Reply-To: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.3.42] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Barracuda-Connect: UNKNOWN[192.168.10.171] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1312316637 X-Barracuda-URL: http://192.168.10.96:80/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at symmetricom.com X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: -1002.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=-1002.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=1000.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 69.25.98.10 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: btv1==19584181083==GDowd@symmetricom.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: NTP Working Group Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Hi Stephen, I am very interested in your analysis. Do you have any plans to publish t= he results in English? If not, are the results available in German? I hav= e a number of German colleagues and I may be able to ask them to translate = the document for us. Greg Dowd gdowd at symmetricom dot com (antispam format) Symmetricom, Inc. www.symmetricom.com "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler" Albert Ei= nstein -----Original Message----- From: ntpwg-bounces+gdowd=3Dsymmetricom.com@lists.ntp.org [mailto:ntpwg-bou= nces+gdowd=3Dsymmetricom.com@lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of Stephen R=F6ttger Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 1:12 PM To: NTP Working Group Subject: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis Hello everyone, Since the discussion about the Autokey-Protocol in June ended abruptly, we want to inform you, that we finished our analysis of the protocol and found several weaknesses, that render it completely useless. Our analysis is in German, but if you are interested in it, we can summarize the weaknesses for you. In addition, we came up with some changes to the protocol, that mitigate the vulnerabilities and would like to present you a revised Autokey-protocol. The changes are: -Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). -Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-packet -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 Regards, Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 13:59:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5216C21F8760 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:59:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.149 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.450, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0a94yUKtVvTA for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 787A321F8757 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BFB186D7D9 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:00:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D15186D75D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 20:53:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.68]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoLxj-0004HW-LV for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 20:53:26 +0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=QurnRAYcBaLUKV4HDmS0kFBNSk3G3Kf6/m1uavz89xMSIKEebz27zSVw0mA7ClP8; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [67.180.133.66] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QoLxd-00054Y-42; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 16:53:09 -0400 Message-ID: <4E3863D1.2080505@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:53:37 -0700 From: todd glassey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= , ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> In-Reply-To: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec790c770c6bac6b661ffbb6af4af853215a350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 67.180.133.66 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.86.89.68 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tglassey@earthlink.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 8/2/2011 1:11 PM, Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: > Hello everyone, > > Since the discussion about the Autokey-Protocol in June ended abruptly, > we want to inform you, that we finished our analysis of the protocol and > found several weaknesses, that render it completely useless Yep... > Our analysis is in German, but if you are interested in it, we can > summarize the weaknesses for you. > > In addition, we came up with some changes to the protocol, that mitigate > the vulnerabilities and would like to present you a revised > Autokey-protocol. > The changes are: > > -Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the > cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as > C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). > > -Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. Good > -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients > are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities YES, but we also may want to integrate some OTPW type token controls as = well. > -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-packet YES > -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used > Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 As long as you are allowing optional algs - then we should support ANY = algs as well as HSM modules too. > Regards, > Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > -- = Todd S. Glassey This is from my personal email account and any materials from this account = come with personal disclaimers. Further I OPT OUT of any and all commercial emailings. _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 14:05:35 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82DC821F87C3 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:05:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char F6 hex): To: Stephen R\366ttger ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99EAC21F8777 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:05:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CABA86DA69 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:05:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from stenn.ntp.org (stenn.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::30]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 370CF86D75D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:04:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=stenn.ntp.org) by stenn.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoM8c-000Jr3-Hc; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:04:30 -0700 To: Stephen Röttger In-reply-to: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> Comments: In-reply-to Stephen Röttger message dated "Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:11:55 +0200." X-Mailer: MH-E 7.4.2; nmh 1.3; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22) Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 1.8) Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:04:30 -0700 From: Harlan Stenn Message-Id: Cc: NTP Working Group Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Hi Stephen and Dieter, I'm interested in the paper and analysis. I'd be happy to see at least a link to this paper on the support.ntp.org site, and in another month I'd like to see it somewhere else (that I'll talk about in 2-3 weeks' time). H _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 14:18:53 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4201411E80A9 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:18:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VlJ-ZxJftgWn for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02B411E808F for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:18:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 694FB86D840 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:18:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF2A286D75D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:17:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-iy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.210.169]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoML7-0007LK-Qs for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 21:17:37 +0000 Received: by iyb14 with SMTP id 14so245672iyb.14 for ; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:17:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:content-type:date:subject:to:message-id:mime-version :x-mailer; bh=I+nu7HpyQmefgyfsCbypKVe4gV25gqsXENc+DB4lyEw=; b=tqAIpL5kHt7oxxj4y3U6S84McC2WjsCVlSdk7ZIc367IHTPpadTrJLcPuMNiqhuY0j pPM8nfB4xk3Q653Uf+iJRkJge4BNb55hKPf2wfr9PI6kA8mfnoRTexrcMGoWyniCQ26m hsWeZhNm+Py2tULZV4SIdnF1YMonECAmijMFw= Received: by 10.42.244.200 with SMTP id lr8mr4272899icb.481.1312319839742; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-18-241.tuc.noao.edu (dhcp-18-241.tuc.noao.edu [140.252.18.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k16sm168558icc.22.2011.08.02.14.17.17 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:17:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Rob Seaman Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 14:17:16 -0700 To: NTP Working Group Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.210.169 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: robertlewisseaman@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6307672975936569952==" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org --===============6307672975936569952== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-100--994812343 --Apple-Mail-100--994812343 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, A workshop has been organized to discuss the implications of the = proposed redefinition of Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). See details = below. We would welcome the opportunity to consider contributions from = the NTP community. Ceasing leap seconds would have implications. These = implications have yet to be considered in detail. The intent of the = meeting is to begin to do so. This topic has a broad natural community = (http://davasobel.com/blog/?p=3D131), even if most stakeholders are = unaware of it. In addition to the astronomy and astronautics talks, = there will be presentations such as on the vision and architecture of = the 10,000 year clock (http://longnow.org/clock/) by one of their = project engineers. We will also have a talk and tour of the grand = Analemmatic Sundial at Longwood Gardens (http://bit.ly/omBqrE) following = the meeting. Ken Seidelmann provided its accurate calibration; the = ITU's redefinition of Coordinated Universal Time would render = calibration rather a moot issue for this and all sundials. Please forward this announcement as may seem appropriate. Thanks! Rob Seaman NOAO -- The chairs of "Decoupling Civil Timekeeping from Earth Rotation" = encourage contributions to this upcoming meeting in Exton, PA (near = Philadelphia) on October 5-6, 2011: http://futureofutc.org/ There will be a final vote at the International Telecommunication Union = assembly in Geneva in January 2012 whether to cease issuing leap = seconds. This will have significant implications for the astronomical = and astronautical communities among others. For more details the = International Earth Rotation Service has circulated the announcement: http://data.iers.org/products/2/14839/orig/message_191.txt Luminaries like Daniel Gambis (who oversees the leap seconds) and Ken = Seidelmann (editor of the Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical = Almanac) will be speaking. For context, see the article in the current issue of American Scientist = magazine: = http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/2011/4/the-future-of-time-= utc-and-the-leap-second (preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3141) Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory Tucson, AZ --Apple-Mail-100--994812343 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii http://davasobel.com/blog/?p=3D= 131), even if most stakeholders are unaware of it.  In addition = to the astronomy and astronautics talks, there will be presentations = such as on the vision and architecture of the 10,000 year clock (http://longnow.org/clock/) by one = of their project engineers.  We will also have a talk and tour of = the grand Analemmatic Sundial at Longwood Gardens (http://bit.ly/omBqrE) following the = meeting.  Ken Seidelmann provided its accurate calibration; the = ITU's redefinition of Coordinated Universal Time would render = calibration rather a moot issue for this and all = sundials.

Please forward this announcement = as may seem appropriate.

Thanks!

Rob = Seaman
NOAO
--

The chairs of = "Decoupling Civil Timekeeping from Earth Rotation" encourage = contributions to this upcoming meeting in Exton, PA (near Philadelphia) = on October 5-6, 2011:


=
There will be a final vote at the International Telecommunication = Union assembly in Geneva in January 2012 whether to cease issuing leap = seconds. This will have significant implications for the astronomical = and astronautical communities among others.  For more details the = International Earth Rotation Service has circulated the = announcement:


Luminaries like Daniel Gambis (who oversees the leap seconds) and Ken = Seidelmann (editor of the Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical = Almanac) will be speaking.

For context, see the = article in the current issue of American Scientist = magazine:

= (preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3141= )

Rob Seaman
National Optical Astronomy = Observatory
Tucson, AZ

= --Apple-Mail-100--994812343-- --===============6307672975936569952== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg --===============6307672975936569952==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 15:33:55 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2957521F8640 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:33:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.448 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id skblOu-Po01I for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:33:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF79A21F8639 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C02A86D831 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 22:33:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9747886D75D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 22:26:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.66]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoNPZ-000Eld-5W for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:26:16 +0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Rmj4kTLL0uJNq7vtu8gYLROfErXNBU3I5njDNdsN4Yt9ujnPa9WYZ/Qk1RoR/60a; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [67.180.133.66] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QoNPS-00009i-OR for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 18:25:59 -0400 Message-ID: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:26:27 -0700 From: todd glassey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: In-Reply-To: X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec7986cdd205f6f6895cd617b2d391e80523350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 67.180.133.66 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.86.89.66 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tglassey@earthlink.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7765912779309541790==" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============7765912779309541790== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030306020404050703060905" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030306020404050703060905 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/2/2011 2:17 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: > Hi, > > A workshop has been organized to discuss the implications of the > proposed redefinition of Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). See > details below. We would welcome the opportunity to consider > contributions from the NTP community. Ceasing leap seconds would have > implications. These implications have yet to be considered in detail. > The intent of the meeting is to begin to do so. > > This topic has a broad natural community > (http://davasobel.com/blog/?p=131), even if most stakeholders are > unaware of it. In addition to the astronomy and astronautics talks, > there will be presentations such as on the vision and architecture of > the 10,000 year clock (http://longnow.org/clock/) by one of their > project engineers. We will also have a talk and tour of the grand > Analemmatic Sundial at Longwood Gardens (http://bit.ly/omBqrE) > following the meeting. Ken Seidelmann provided its accurate > calibration; the ITU's redefinition of Coordinated Universal Time > would render calibration rather a moot issue for this and all sundials. > Rob how does this pertain to the upcoming meeting at BIPM in October 2011? todd > Please forward this announcement as may seem appropriate. > > Thanks! > > Rob Seaman > NOAO > -- > > The chairs of "Decoupling Civil Timekeeping from Earth Rotation" > encourage contributions to this upcoming meeting in Exton, PA (near > Philadelphia) on October 5-6, 2011: > > http://futureofutc.org/ > > There will be a final vote at the International Telecommunication > Union assembly in Geneva in January 2012 whether to cease issuing leap > seconds. This will have significant implications for the astronomical > and astronautical communities among others. For more details the > International Earth Rotation Service has circulated the announcement: > > http://data.iers.org/products/2/14839/orig/message_191.txt > > Luminaries like Daniel Gambis (who oversees the leap seconds) and Ken > Seidelmann (editor of the Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical > Almanac) will be speaking. > > For context, see the article in the current issue of American > Scientist magazine: > > http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/2011/4/the-future-of-time-utc-and-the-leap-second > (preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3141) > > Rob Seaman > National Optical Astronomy Observatory > Tucson, AZ > > > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg -- Todd S. Glassey This is from my personal email account and any materials from this account come with personal disclaimers. Further I OPT OUT of any and all commercial emailings. --------------030306020404050703060905 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/2/2011 2:17 PM, Rob Seaman wrote:
Hi,

A workshop has been organized to discuss the implications of the proposed redefinition of Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).  See details below.  We would welcome the opportunity to consider contributions from the NTP community.  Ceasing leap seconds would have implications.  These implications have yet to be considered in detail.  The intent of the meeting is to begin to do so.

This topic has a broad natural community (http://davasobel.com/blog/?p=131), even if most stakeholders are unaware of it.  In addition to the astronomy and astronautics talks, there will be presentations such as on the vision and architecture of the 10,000 year clock (http://longnow.org/clock/) by one of their project engineers.  We will also have a talk and tour of the grand Analemmatic Sundial at Longwood Gardens (http://bit.ly/omBqrE) following the meeting.  Ken Seidelmann provided its accurate calibration; the ITU's redefinition of Coordinated Universal Time would render calibration rather a moot issue for this and all sundials.


Rob how does this pertain to the upcoming meeting at BIPM in October 2011?

todd
Please forward this announcement as may seem appropriate.

Thanks!

Rob Seaman
NOAO
--

The chairs of "Decoupling Civil Timekeeping from Earth Rotation" encourage contributions to this upcoming meeting in Exton, PA (near Philadelphia) on October 5-6, 2011:


There will be a final vote at the International Telecommunication Union assembly in Geneva in January 2012 whether to cease issuing leap seconds. This will have significant implications for the astronomical and astronautical communities among others.  For more details the International Earth Rotation Service has circulated the announcement:


Luminaries like Daniel Gambis (who oversees the leap seconds) and Ken Seidelmann (editor of the Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac) will be speaking.

For context, see the article in the current issue of American Scientist magazine:


Rob Seaman
National Optical Astronomy Observatory
Tucson, AZ


_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg


-- 
Todd S. Glassey
This is from my personal email account and any materials from this account come with personal disclaimers. 

Further I OPT OUT of any and all commercial emailings.
--------------030306020404050703060905-- --===============7765912779309541790== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg --===============7765912779309541790==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 16:04:34 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D52621F84F1 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 16:04:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fIMw0OoVgH59 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 16:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25A7F21F84E9 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 16:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D36BA86D762 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 23:04:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6070286D75D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 22:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-iy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.210.169]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoNsS-000IDW-8U for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 22:56:07 +0000 Received: by iyb14 with SMTP id 14so349281iyb.14 for ; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:55:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=/XzOqF0jp/bNcpZLjhfHbIAIeNoMC28+bNPnh4i3xFo=; b=MRw2PVYT2ZTTiukeNcEKDwu5zdv7/v7BLlYqZZYkocBUNKpigqs+bYbjcJ0n5BXykw pSkVlEwZdp6t5t05CqifvWYjdyTF32nwRZ1csM0NWv53shY8Mz7GqFMAX4t5AdNCiKQg 1LU5yoUW8pIizlEwRT0Ef6kj49VYD2Lb8MdM8= Received: by 10.42.166.136 with SMTP id o8mr118105icy.120.1312325750303; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:55:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-18-241.tuc.noao.edu (dhcp-18-241.tuc.noao.edu [140.252.18.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t14sm143033ibi.23.2011.08.02.15.55.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:55:49 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: Rob Seaman In-Reply-To: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:55:47 -0700 Message-Id: <4E69CE7E-CB96-4D25-B6B4-52C9D5E7A084@noao.edu> References: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> To: todd glassey X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.210.169 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: robertlewisseaman@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Hi Todd, > Rob how does this pertain to the upcoming meeting at BIPM in October 2011? Hmm - lots of meetings. For BIPM I see from: http://www.bipm.org/en/practical_info/diary/ two meetings in October, the 100th meeting of the CIPM and the 24th General Conference on Weights and Measures. Are you referring to one of these? Our meeting is sponsored by various organizations, but isn't a meeting of any of them if you get my drift. We plan a discussion of engineering issues, not politics. It seems about time (take the pun any way you like) to talk about impacts and remediation, requirements and risks, funding and infrastructure. We'll publish the talks online and the proceedings via an established press. The discussion to date (including the current Metrologia, free for the nonce at http://iopscience.iop.org/0026-1394/48/4), has been remarkably short on details of logistics, software, systems engineering and other pragmatic realities. NTP is how time is delivered. What kind of time will that be? Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory http://futureofutc.org _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 17:20:48 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B00C11E80F2 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:20:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.486 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.486 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.113, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wy1UXv8fqqSO for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A49A11E80F0 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:20:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D6186D7D9 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 00:20:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED40F86D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 00:15:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.66]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoP75-00023s-7z for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 00:15:18 +0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=fOWR9zXE7yeBOwcLIeWmvIqPm99dTAP//vpSvRo2OHGP9UgkhUK5SlQBkolIG2hq; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [67.180.133.66] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-spurfowl.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QoP6z-0001vU-1m; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 20:15:01 -0400 Message-ID: <4E389320.3090700@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 17:15:28 -0700 From: todd glassey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rob Seaman References: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> <4E69CE7E-CB96-4D25-B6B4-52C9D5E7A084@noao.edu> In-Reply-To: <4E69CE7E-CB96-4D25-B6B4-52C9D5E7A084@noao.edu> X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec7915157d176501651b07b35feec48cff98350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 67.180.133.66 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.86.89.66 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tglassey@earthlink.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 8/2/2011 3:55 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: > Hi Todd, > >> Rob how does this pertain to the upcoming meeting at BIPM in October 2011? > Hmm - lots of meetings. For BIPM I see from: > > http://www.bipm.org/en/practical_info/diary/ > > two meetings in October, the 100th meeting of the CIPM and the 24th General Conference on Weights and Measures. Yep - that's the one. > Are you referring to one of these? There is a motion to change several of the standards definition up before the 24th and an ad hoc petition to qualify a new type of timing operations laboratory... Todd > Our meeting is sponsored by various organizations, but isn't a meeting of any of them if you get my drift. We plan a discussion of engineering issues, not politics. It seems about time (take the pun any way you like) to talk about impacts and remediation, requirements and risks, funding and infrastructure. We'll publish the talks online and the proceedings via an established press. The discussion to date (including the current Metrologia, free for the nonce at http://iopscience.iop.org/0026-1394/48/4), has been remarkably short on details of logistics, software, systems engineering and other pragmatic realities. > > NTP is how time is delivered. What kind of time will that be? > > Rob Seaman > National Optical Astronomy Observatory > http://futureofutc.org > > -- Todd S. Glassey This is from my personal email account and any materials from this account come with personal disclaimers. Further I OPT OUT of any and all commercial emailings. _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 19:21:59 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A5311E80A7 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 19:21:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RqWbVslGc84c for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 19:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 745C911E8077 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 19:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67F5A86D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 02:22:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D9E86D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 02:07:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.213.41]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoQrU-000Cnr-79 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 02:07:19 +0000 Received: by ywa6 with SMTP id 6so286680ywa.14 for ; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 19:07:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=UGbG5okfqwSOsmwqkQ6lBGUcT6JHac9mh7i+5zmhaSI=; b=X8i5QYxQ2WiBc/YKvV4agsyv2fwk6TYgFIoD/C4XSjUDRD1uPSn9E/Rukpbb7u2Bye VTSxM1frMlKsTb+tPrXCdbbgqXLIecCl8vumk0HNyu3LlNlWzNbHiyVrRDVVwcysIuu9 nB1oev2VJYASwJHxo5h7HhMb4k9r19oVjmLZY= Received: by 10.143.26.28 with SMTP id d28mr4018318wfj.419.1312337221956; Tue, 02 Aug 2011 19:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.2] (ip70-190-195-89.ph.ph.cox.net [70.190.195.89]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p7sm462825pbn.65.2011.08.02.19.06.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 02 Aug 2011 19:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3) From: Rob Seaman In-Reply-To: <4E389320.3090700@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 19:06:59 -0700 Message-Id: <102F9085-D311-424B-9742-C778C9A5627D@noao.edu> References: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> <4E69CE7E-CB96-4D25-B6B4-52C9D5E7A084@noao.edu> <4E389320.3090700@earthlink.net> To: todd glassey X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.213.41 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: robertlewisseaman@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On Aug 2, 2011, at 5:15 PM, todd glassy wrote: > There is a motion to change several of the standards definition up before the 24th and an ad hoc petition to qualify a new type of timing operations laboratory... Yes, I had heard something about that. Are there links to said motion or petition? That said, the CFP describing our meeting is at: http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/futureofutc/callforpapers.cfm We welcome submissions related to NTP. For instance, I rely on NTP to attach a UTC tag on thousands of astronomical images nightly from 30 or so singular cameras on a dozen telescopes on three remote mountaintops in both the northern and southern hemispheres. It matters for a number of contingent use cases, both simple and esoteric, that UTC is actually Universal Time. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory http://futureofutc.org _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Aug 2 21:07:02 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9F411E812D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:07:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RF01gzSPTgoN for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF2E11E8137 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2011 21:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5E4F86D78E for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 04:07:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B233086D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 04:01:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pool-141-157-191-123.bstnma.btas.verizon.net ([141.157.191.123] helo=[10.10.10.102]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoSdZ-0000lw-7P; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 04:01:04 +0000 Message-ID: <4E38C7F2.5030309@ntp.org> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 00:00:50 -0400 From: Danny Mayer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> In-Reply-To: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 141.157.191.123 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: s.roettger@tu-bs.de, ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mayer@ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: NTP Working Group Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 8/2/2011 4:11 PM, Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: > Hello everyone, > = > Since the discussion about the Autokey-Protocol in June ended abruptly, Sorry about that. It wasn't meant to leave this dragging. July tends to be the start of a lot of people's holidays but you weren't forgotten. In fact the subject was mentioned last week at the IETF Conference. > we want to inform you, that we finished our analysis of the protocol and > found several weaknesses, that render it completely useless. > Our analysis is in German, but if you are interested in it, we can > summarize the weaknesses for you. It's really important to understand what these are. So if you can send us a pointer to the paper even if in German and also tell us here what you perceive the weaknesses are we can make a start on resolving the issues. > = > In addition, we came up with some changes to the protocol, that mitigate > the vulnerabilities and would like to present you a revised > Autokey-protocol. > The changes are: > = > -Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the > cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as > C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). Why do you think that it is necessary to go to all this trouble and Where would the server get the client's public key? > = > -Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. > = Fine but what does it really buy us? > -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients > are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities > = Does the PKI depend on reliable timm? > -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-packet > = You need a way to signal this. > -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used > Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 This has already been raised as an issue. We believe it's just a minor issue in the reference implementation and the protocol already supports this. We don't believe that it is necessary to change the protocool for this. Danny > = > Regards, > Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 06:25:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7135B21F8B46 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:25:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0hLiNHBxC98i for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:25:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6C221F8B6C for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C298D86D76B for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:25:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D8F086D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 12:55:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailfront3.rz.tu-bs.de ([134.169.12.134] helo=tu-bs.de) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoazD-000Ak8-Pq for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:55:59 +0000 Received: from [192.53.103.10] (account y0034674@tu-braunschweig.de HELO [192.168.4.193]) by rz.tu-bs.de (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.13) with ESMTPA id 8419739; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 14:55:39 +0200 Message-ID: <4E394471.3040903@tu-bs.de> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 14:52:01 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110720 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Dowd References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> <26FBD265CD8D234EAF41115A180F92BB38AF02AC@SJC-MBX-01.symmetricom.com> In-Reply-To: <26FBD265CD8D234EAF41115A180F92BB38AF02AC@SJC-MBX-01.symmetricom.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 134.169.12.134 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: s.roettger@tu-bs.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: NTP Working Group , dieter.sibold@ptb.de Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Greg, Yes, there are plans to publish the results in english. The german version is not public yet, but presumably will be in a few weeks. However I can summarize the discovered vulnerabilities (mainly for client-server-mode): -The bitlenghts of the cookie and the server seed are only 32 Bit long. This leads to an attacker being able to Brute Force them. For example he can request a cookie from a server and try all 2^32 possibilites as server seed and calculate corresponding cookies. If he finds one that matches the cookie he received from the server, he has found the secret server seed and can consequently calculate cookies for every client. The same applies for brute-forcing the cookie. The attacker can intercept a packet with a MAC and try to generate the MAC himself using every possible of the 2^32 cookie-values, till he found the one that matches. For comparison, 2^32 MD5 calculations take roughly 25minutes on my 2,5ghz laptop using only one thread. (though cookie brute-forcing will take 2 MD5 calculations for each try) -The Identity Schemes (except the private certificate scheme) provide no security. The TC scheme accepts a certificate as that of a Trusted Authority if it includes a extension 'CA=3DTrue'. Nothing prevents an attacker from generating such a certificate himself. We discovered a flaw in all three challenge-response identity schemes (IFF, MV, GQ), that allowed us to send a response that would always be accepted by the client. In addition, the challenge-response schemes don't offer protection against a man-in-the-middle. Such an attacker might just forward the clients challenge to the real server, get the correct answer and again forward this to the client. -The server identifies clients using their IP-Address (which is easily forgable). An attacker can send a cookie request to the server using the clients IP and the server will send the clients cookie to this IP encrypted with the Public Key attached to the request. Since the attacker chose this Public Key, he can intercept the response and decrypt the cookie. The cookie can then be used to calculate MACs and masquerade as the server. (We wrote proof-of-concept code for this last attack and were able to change a clients time as a man-in-the-middle) Stephen On 08/02/11 22:23, Greg Dowd wrote: > Hi Stephen, > I am very interested in your analysis. Do you have any plans to publish= the results in English? If not, are the results available in German? I h= ave a number of German colleagues and I may be able to ask them to translat= e the document for us. > = > = > Greg Dowd > gdowd at symmetricom dot com (antispam format) > Symmetricom, Inc. > www.symmetricom.com > "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler" Albert = Einstein > -----Original Message----- > From: ntpwg-bounces+gdowd=3Dsymmetricom.com@lists.ntp.org [mailto:ntpwg-b= ounces+gdowd=3Dsymmetricom.com@lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of Stephen R=F6ttger > Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 1:12 PM > To: NTP Working Group > Subject: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis > = > Hello everyone, > = > Since the discussion about the Autokey-Protocol in June ended abruptly, > we want to inform you, that we finished our analysis of the protocol and > found several weaknesses, that render it completely useless. > Our analysis is in German, but if you are interested in it, we can > summarize the weaknesses for you. > = > In addition, we came up with some changes to the protocol, that mitigate > the vulnerabilities and would like to present you a revised > Autokey-protocol. > The changes are: > = > -Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the > cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as > C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). > = > -Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. > = > -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients > are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities > = > -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-packet > = > -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used > Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 > = > Regards, > Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 06:26:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3D721F8B56 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:26:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ahAbpxjF6khY for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F7D821F8B6A for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C25986DA6B for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:27:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 017A786D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:05:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailfront3.rz.tu-bs.de ([134.169.12.134] helo=tu-bs.de) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Qob8R-000E3K-D8 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:05:29 +0000 Received: from [192.53.103.10] (account y0034674@tu-braunschweig.de HELO [192.168.4.193]) by rz.tu-bs.de (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.13) with ESMTPA id 8419781; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:05:12 +0200 Message-ID: <4E3946AE.6030602@tu-bs.de> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:01:34 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110720 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: todd glassey References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> <4E3863D1.2080505@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <4E3863D1.2080505@earthlink.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 134.169.12.134 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: s.roettger@tu-bs.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org, dieter.sibold@ptb.de Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Todd, On 08/02/11 22:53, todd glassey wrote: > On 8/2/2011 1:11 PM, Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: [...] >> -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients >> are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities > YES, but we also may want to integrate some OTPW type token controls as > well. Can you explain this further? Do you refer to the way how the autokey-lists are generated (roughly after lamports otp-scheme)? This seems to add protection only against forging of messages but no additional protection against modification attacks. >> -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole >> NTP-packet > YES >> -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used >> Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 > As long as you are allowing optional algs - then we should support ANY > algs as well as HSM modules too. We analyzed the use of MD5 and the simple MAC-Algorithm used (H(key||packet)) and could not find any vulnerabilities in this, though MD5 is known to provide no collision-resistance. The security demands to the hash function include only, that it provides preimage-resistance (which MD5 still does). Changing the used algorithms would simply be to provide the possibility of fips 140-2 compliance. I am not sure if this is needed though. Stephen _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 06:42:51 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8800221F88A6 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:42:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.149 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7OuAvXA6iMBK for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82D6521F89C2 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 06:42:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2853286D765 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:43:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 463AD86D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:12:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailfront3.rz.tu-bs.de ([134.169.12.134] helo=tu-bs.de) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QobF8-000E5Z-PA for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:12:26 +0000 Received: from [192.53.103.10] (account y0034674@tu-braunschweig.de HELO [192.168.4.193]) by rz.tu-bs.de (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.13) with ESMTPA id 8419818; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:12:08 +0200 Message-ID: <4E39484E.4030608@tu-bs.de> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:08:30 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110720 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Harlan Stenn References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 134.169.12.134 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: s.roettger@tu-bs.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: NTP Working Group , dieter.sibold@ptb.de Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Harlan, as I wrote to Greg, the german paper is not yet public and we plan to release it in a few weeks. But I hope the summary in my mail to Greg will give an idea of the vulnerabilities. Stephen On 08/02/11 23:04, Harlan Stenn wrote: > Hi Stephen and Dieter, > > I'm interested in the paper and analysis. > > I'd be happy to see at least a link to this paper on the support.ntp.org > site, and in another month I'd like to see it somewhere else (that I'll > talk about in 2-3 weeks' time). > > H _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 07:03:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9044A21F8A1A for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 07:03:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yNVhrFyD+dqW for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 07:03:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5335021F8A7A for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 07:03:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D7F86DA59 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 14:03:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4274186D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:30:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailfront3.rz.tu-bs.de ([134.169.12.134] helo=tu-bs.de) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QobWF-000ECB-9y for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:30:06 +0000 Received: from [192.53.103.10] (account y0034674@tu-braunschweig.de HELO [192.168.4.193]) by rz.tu-bs.de (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.13) with ESMTPA id 8419898; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:29:48 +0200 Message-ID: <4E394C72.2050801@tu-bs.de> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:26:10 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110720 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Danny Mayer References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> <4E38C7F2.5030309@ntp.org> In-Reply-To: <4E38C7F2.5030309@ntp.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 134.169.12.134 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: s.roettger@tu-bs.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: NTP Working Group , dieter.sibold@ptb.de Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 08/03/11 06:00, Danny Mayer wrote: > On 8/2/2011 4:11 PM, Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: [...] >> The changes are: >> >> -Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the >> cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as >> C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). > = > Why do you think that it is necessary to go to all this trouble and Please see my third point in my mail to greg. Since the server holds no state about clients, he has no way of checking that consecutive requests from an IP-address belong to the same client. Therefor, an attacker can spoof his IP to that of a client and can request the corresponding cookie from the server. If the public key is included in this calculation, he will either not get the same cookie as the client does or he will not be able to decrypt it. > Where would the server get the client's public key? The Client would have to attach it's public key to every request. As a side note: Since the length of the public key would cause the MAC calculation to use at least one additional Round of the used hash-function, it could be switched to the hash of the public key: C =3D H(H(PubKey), ServerSeed) In this case there would be no additional overhead to the MAC-calculation. > = >> >> -Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. >> > Fine but what does it really buy us? Again, please see point 1 in my mail to greg. A 32-bit cookie and server seed can be easily brute-forced by an attacker. > = >> -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients >> are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities >> > = > Does the PKI depend on reliable timm? That is an interesting question. The public key infrastructure used by SSL/TLS relies on certificate revocation lists and expiration dates. Expiration Dates can obviously not be verified before having doing the time synchronisation, but that seems to be a chicken-or-egg problem. > = >> -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-pack= et >> > = > You need a way to signal this. > = >> -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used >> Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 > = > This has already been raised as an issue. We believe it's just a minor > issue in the reference implementation and the protocol already supports > this. We don't believe that it is necessary to change the protocool for > this. Yes, we also think that this is not critical. > = > Danny >> >> Regards, >> Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 08:29:38 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E646E21F8ACE for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:29:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.907 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.092, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6WcXGSy6RTxm for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:29:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC21021F8A95 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 08:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C17C86D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 15:29:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C251D86D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 15:02:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.64]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Qocxq-000Os9-Le for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:02:41 +0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=grbFU2lQ3xI3Kgtyiw1gRV8ezaTUN2xFF31WTJGUAyOM8894cZ+HVA5RCznGY2SZ; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [207.111.209.5] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-curtail.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Qocxk-0008A6-D2 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 11:02:24 -0400 Message-ID: <4E39631D.4010800@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 08:02:53 -0700 From: todd glassey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> <4E38C7F2.5030309@ntp.org> In-Reply-To: <4E38C7F2.5030309@ntp.org> X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79ac9bb89cffc1d6164ca72c4182f81631350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 207.111.209.5 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.86.89.64 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tglassey@earthlink.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 8/2/2011 9:00 PM, Danny Mayer wrote: > On 8/2/2011 4:11 PM, Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> Since the discussion about the Autokey-Protocol in June ended abruptly, > Sorry about that. It wasn't meant to leave this dragging. July tends to > be the start of a lot of people's holidays but you weren't forgotten. In > fact the subject was mentioned last week at the IETF Conference. > >> we want to inform you, that we finished our analysis of the protocol and >> found several weaknesses, that render it completely useless. >> Our analysis is in German, but if you are interested in it, we can >> summarize the weaknesses for you. > It's really important to understand what these are. So if you can send > us a pointer to the paper even if in German and also tell us here what > you perceive the weaknesses are we can make a start on resolving the issu= es. > >> In addition, we came up with some changes to the protocol, that mitigate >> the vulnerabilities and would like to present you a revised >> Autokey-protocol. >> The changes are: >> >> -Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the >> cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as >> C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). > Why do you think that it is necessary to go to all this trouble As to why, it brings NTP into compliance as another tool using the x509 = identity control models. This means that parties running NTP as a part = of a larger practice can use the same identity sets for everything = making this model more easily audited. > and > Where would the server get the client's public key? As to how , there are any number of ways this can be resolved including = a new Key Lookup Request Type fo' verifying 'right to connect' type acl = controls. >> -Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. >> > Fine but what does it really buy us? A better and larger key seed (or nonce) . >> -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients >> are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities >> > Does the PKI depend on reliable timm? It would depend on how long the cert is valid for so yes it can >> -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-pack= et >> > You need a way to signal this. > Agreed but its doable. > >> Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > -- = Todd S. Glassey This is from my personal email account and any materials from this account = come with personal disclaimers. Further I OPT OUT of any and all commercial emailings. _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 09:47:19 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ACD921F8B15 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 09:47:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.291 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.291 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.308, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gBKOCWBMUdZA for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 09:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E1121F8AEC for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 09:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8631A86D77C for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 16:47:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D6086D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 16:19:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.67]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QoeA8-0008j6-W7 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 16:19:28 +0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Jd35StfMN2e/E+ORxOffW066alLoK5H0tW8BLTRs/r2LghGd6IL0bfXysds8pkZ1; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [207.111.209.5] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QoeA2-0006eH-LS; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:19:10 -0400 Message-ID: <4E39751B.1030209@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 09:19:39 -0700 From: todd glassey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rob Seaman References: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> <4E69CE7E-CB96-4D25-B6B4-52C9D5E7A084@noao.edu> <4E389320.3090700@earthlink.net> <102F9085-D311-424B-9742-C778C9A5627D@noao.edu> In-Reply-To: <102F9085-D311-424B-9742-C778C9A5627D@noao.edu> X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec795986dbf4ef407315dd904d079ca90026350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 207.111.209.5 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.86.89.67 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tglassey@earthlink.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 8/2/2011 7:06 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: > On Aug 2, 2011, at 5:15 PM, todd glassy wrote: > >> There is a motion to change several of the standards definition up before the 24th and an ad hoc petition to qualify a new type of timing operations laboratory... > Yes, I had heard something about that. Are there links to said motion or petition? > > That said, the CFP describing our meeting is at: > > http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/futureofutc/callforpapers.cfm > > We welcome submissions related to NTP. For instance, I rely on NTP to attach a UTC tag on thousands of astronomical images nightly from 30 or so singular cameras on a dozen telescopes on three remote mountaintops in both the northern and southern hemispheres. Cool - I used to write code for nuclear event imaging and analysis at SLAC so this application is one which is near and dear to my heart... We used to need to tag the images to within picoseconds to properly simulate the events in the analysis system (for both the 40" Hydrogen Bubble Chamber and the SPEAR collider). > It matters for a number of contingent use cases, both simple and esoteric, You mean "of legal nature" or more esoteric than that? > that UTC is actually Universal Time. I agree - I am working with several governmental groups outside of NIST to ensure reliable time is available for securities and banking. But what you are really looking for is a TIMESTAMPING SOLUTION WHICH USES A REFERENCE CLOCK INSTEAD OF THE HOST OS... this would allow for the timestamping of the images from a centralized location including across International Borders. We have NTP running as a time-stamp server now if you want more info. We also have this code running in a a vanilla nVidia GPU - as in "an off-the-shelf graphics card" and the performance smokes. This is important since I am now locked in a patent fraud litigation with Symmetricom which if they lose likely makes them a wholly owned division of "my fat arse", but either way means there shareholders are likely to carve their board a new rectum in the process. Todd > Rob Seaman > National Optical Astronomy Observatory > http://futureofutc.org > > -- Todd S. Glassey This is from my personal email account and any materials from this account come with personal disclaimers. Further I OPT OUT of any and all commercial emailings. _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 10:46:14 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 561A621F8B13 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 10:46:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FrKbUO96nznF for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 10:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A57A621F8B0A for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 10:46:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84A1F86DA65 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 17:46:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D7A86D763 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 17:28:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx04.gis.net ([208.218.130.12]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QofF0-000FeJ-Ls for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 17:28:37 +0000 Received: from [10.60.111.38] ([198.22.153.9]) by mx04.gis.net; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:24:25 -0400 Message-ID: <4E398533.7030400@ntp.org> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:28:19 -0400 From: Danny Mayer Organization: NTP User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: todd glassey References: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> <4E69CE7E-CB96-4D25-B6B4-52C9D5E7A084@noao.edu> <4E389320.3090700@earthlink.net> <102F9085-D311-424B-9742-C778C9A5627D@noao.edu> <4E39751B.1030209@earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <4E39751B.1030209@earthlink.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 208.218.130.12 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mayer@ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: mayer@ntp.org List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 8/3/2011 12:19 PM, todd glassey wrote: > This is important since I am now locked in a patent fraud litigation Please keep this offlist. This needs to be handled by the lawyers from both sides and a judge. It has no place here. Danny _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 12:49:46 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8D5921F882E for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 12:49:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kepbWH+oL1CU for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 12:49:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F93221F8828 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 12:49:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70C8186D765 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:49:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C85986D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:20:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-iy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.210.169]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QogzL-0003KI-9e for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 19:20:30 +0000 Received: by iyb14 with SMTP id 14so1711558iyb.14 for ; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:20:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=AW4PF7vYBsQeHYTb8lVbJG+fhsZZo1fDRlottiCvWJE=; b=wiGyJ4NcMtgErGPBgRxQUW6tdQylHYBlEcHMEWbLqrkVIPPIrmqMW9I5wy0hwxhODh /E3nNg3PDdKIC6xqQJQaCLKCOq79oby3a/t6zkKvVGYG1BDr35DPhxBGHZADMoX7oLma RlOBESWtqaTustTIEFzDdMlM7b8TjnzP0/dww= Received: by 10.42.156.195 with SMTP id a3mr5797221icx.460.1312399212672; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:20:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-18-241.tuc.noao.edu (dhcp-18-241.tuc.noao.edu [140.252.18.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hq1sm1491039icc.14.2011.08.03.12.20.09 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) From: Rob Seaman In-Reply-To: <4E39751B.1030209@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 12:20:08 -0700 Message-Id: References: <4E387993.70705@earthlink.net> <4E69CE7E-CB96-4D25-B6B4-52C9D5E7A084@noao.edu> <4E389320.3090700@earthlink.net> <102F9085-D311-424B-9742-C778C9A5627D@noao.edu> <4E39751B.1030209@earthlink.net> To: NTP Working Group X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.210.169 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: robertlewisseaman@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Meeting of interest to the NTP working group X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On Aug 3, 2011, at 9:19 AM, todd glassey wrote: > Cool - I used to write code for nuclear event imaging and analysis at SLAC so this application is one which is near and dear to my heart... We used to need to tag the images to within picoseconds to properly simulate the events in the analysis system (for both the 40" Hydrogen Bubble Chamber and the SPEAR collider). High precision is only one possible class of requirement. Accurate agreement with an external standard (in this case the orientation of the Earth) is another. Some projects need both, for instance radio interferometers or neutrino telescopes. >> It matters for a number of contingent use cases, both simple and esoteric, > > You mean "of legal nature" or more esoteric than that? Legal issues don't bear (much) on pure scientific research such as astronomy. We do timestamp images to control proprietary access, generally for something like an 18-month period. Rather the interpretation of observational data depends on the specification of the location of the observer as well as the target. Both ground-based and space-based telescopes are themselves in motion. Universal Time is embedded in endless ways in the software and logistics. UTC provides a convenient way to get UT. NTP provides a convenient way to get UTC. For instance we relied on NTP in the mid-90s for an asteroseismological (good scrabble word if it fits on the board) experiment that extended over several months such that the light travel correction varied from night-to-night due to the motion of the Earth. The entire set of 40,000 spectra is locked to a 60s heliocentric cadence with about 0.01s precision/accuracy. NTP tamed the system clock and UTC provided both the precision of an atomic timescale and the accuracy needed for Earth orientation. That said, civil timekeeping is responsive to much broader requirements, legal, historical, cultural, logistical, navigational, etc, that themselves may derive from mean solar time and thus impact UTC as currently known. >> that UTC is actually Universal Time. > > I agree - I am working with several governmental groups outside of NIST to ensure reliable time is available for securities and banking. But what you are really looking for is a TIMESTAMPING SOLUTION WHICH USES A REFERENCE CLOCK INSTEAD OF THE HOST OS... this would allow for the timestamping of the images from a centralized location including across International Borders. Well, no. I'm perfectly happy with NTP. For one thing these many cameras on remote mountaintops were built by different institutions at times stretching back more than a quarter of a century. The data acquisition systems run on something like 10 different operating systems and legacy hardware (eg, SunOS Sparcs with S11W cards emulating even older DEC interfaces). NTP is one of the few tools I can count on being supported on all platforms. It is typically the case that each camera itself has its own reference clock as you describe. These break in weird and wonderful ways (one camera needs to be reset every three days or there's a clock buffer overflow) and the host/NTP timestamp is instrumental in detecting and correcting the issues and in tying these very different systems together into a coherent system of systems passing calendar date and epoch tokens back to the central data archive. Since telescope time is a valuable resource and since network access to remote locations in the Andes will always remain fragile (consider earthquakes in Chile), it is also a requirement that a clock local to the telescope dome be used. NTP is robust against network downtime - meaning I have never needed to worry about the strata sorting themselves out when the network comes back up. Even if the commercial power is down to half the mountain, a particular camera can take useful on-sky or calibration data as long as the instrument and data acquisition computer can run off the generator (even if the GPS clock - and central data archive - in some other building is down, for instance). NTP is swell. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory http://futureofutc.org _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 3 13:05:09 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E8AB21F86A5 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:05:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.136 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.136 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.163, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UPZd8bzPQigN for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:05:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BCDC21F83E2 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 13:05:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6A2F86DA65 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 20:05:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E7AF86D75D for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 19:45:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.68]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QohNF-0006hX-IE for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 19:45:12 +0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=pWc0MdV4tCjh1FcxGIAzbGFtPSOqUHKvOs/az+IkOYmsaZ4gCmLsxXDBF5hQxxMu; h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [207.111.209.5] (helo=[192.168.1.100]) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QohN8-0005ii-IL; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 15:44:54 -0400 Message-ID: <4E39A552.5090300@earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2011 12:45:22 -0700 From: todd glassey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> <4E3863D1.2080505@earthlink.net> <4E3946AE.6030602@tu-bs.de> In-Reply-To: <4E3946AE.6030602@tu-bs.de> X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec793fc3741857bc99d3a0fd0977f1f8c5aa350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 207.111.209.5 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.86.89.68 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tglassey@earthlink.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org, dieter.sibold@ptb.de Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org On 8/3/2011 6:01 AM, Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: > Todd, > > On 08/02/11 22:53, todd glassey wrote: >> On 8/2/2011 1:11 PM, Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: > [...] >>> -Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients >>> are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities >> YES, but we also may want to integrate some OTPW type token controls as >> well. > Can you explain this further? Do you refer to the way how the > autokey-lists are generated (roughly after lamports otp-scheme)? yes but we did a key exchange system called BLUNT TUNNELING back at = Coastek for the collapsed TCP/IP stack (it ran in the User Space instead = of OS/System Space) and that would work rather well here I think. > This seems to add protection only against forging of messages but no > additional protection against modification attacks. Yes I agree - but this was an original design consideration which we are = paying for now. >>> -Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole >>> NTP-packet >> YES >>> -(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used >>> Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 >> As long as you are allowing optional algs - then we should support ANY >> algs as well as HSM modules too. > We analyzed the use of MD5 and the simple MAC-Algorithm used > (H(key||packet)) and could not find any vulnerabilities in this, though > MD5 is known to provide no collision-resistance. > Agreed, but the v3 of the NSA SUITE-B tools would be what I was looking = at. Possibly also some of Suite-A v1... To do this we need an open = interface for the crypt subsystem. Also building the sense of COI's = (Communities of Interest) into the package would help. As another option RFC 2522 key management could be interesting as well. > The security demands to the hash function include only, that it provides > preimage-resistance (which MD5 still does). yes... > Changing the used algorithms would simply be to provide the possibility > of fips 140-2 compliance. I am not sure if this is needed though. it is... trust me on that. So is a full end-to-end CODE BLUEPRINTING = which is the last step in a Release Engineering effort (at least in the = ones who worked for me). The BP was a formal trace run and security = analysis which documented each thread and its actions within the code = when called. > Stephen > -- = Todd S. Glassey This is from my personal email account and any materials from this account = come with personal disclaimers. Further I OPT OUT of any and all commercial emailings. _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Thu Aug 4 09:35:23 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7318921F8BAC for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 09:35:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.148 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.449, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_16=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D+oNZhP9fnw1 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 09:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2D621F8888 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 09:35:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AABA86D762 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 16:35:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A818486D75D for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 16:13:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from louie.udel.edu ([128.4.40.12] helo=mail.eecis.udel.edu) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Qp0YM-000HaS-Bk for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:13:57 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-74-109-5-222.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [74.109.5.222]) (Authenticated sender: mills@mail.eecis.udel.edu) by mail.eecis.udel.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 614C8619; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 12:13:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E3AC526.7010902@udel.edu> Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:13:26 +0000 From: "David L. Mills" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stephen_R=F6ttger?= References: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> In-Reply-To: <4E385A0B.70206@tu-bs.de> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 128.4.40.12 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mills@udel.edu X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: NTP Working Group Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Autokey-Protocol Analysis X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Stephen, Thanks for your contributions in a security analysis of the Autokey = protocol, although it might have wider appeal in English. As it is, my = German is decidedly rusty, but I could translate if necessary. = Meanwhile, I have further refined my own analysis in the white paper = Security Analysis of the NTP Protocol = http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/security.html, which includes probably = the same vulnerabilities as you report. My analysis and most probably yours, identify two serious middleman = hazards, what I call the cookie snatcher and propaganda attacks. The = former is a tough one to fix and may yield to your insights, but I am = confused by your suggested fix. Any true fix has to consider both the = server private value and some sort of client private value, perhaps the = host encryption key. For others that might be reading this message and for historical = context, the original Autokey design was circa 1996 as documented in an = internal report. Subsequently in the early 2000s the design was reviewed = by the STIME task force, which resulted in a revised specification in = late 2005. That document was submitted as an informational RFC and = eventually published five years later as RFC 5906. That RFC is intend as = target practice and a possible starting point for new algorithms. One = might observe this protocol is fifteen years old and the specification = was last reviewed in 2005. In any case, the existing code is = specifically designed in a modular fashion and can be removed and = replaced in whole or in part with evolved algorithms. Note that our current discussion is on client/server mode that might be = used by a national time server network. However, the algorithms and = protocol also have to work in both basic and interleaved modes, and in = symmetric and broadcast modes. The algorithms and protocol also have to = support multiple security groups, as defined in the specification. I = suspect your analysis does not consider these modes, but mine does. = There continues to be issues in the initial volley in broadcast mode, = where the present code does not precisely calibrate the roundtrip delay. = Corrections for this are included, along with a careful analysis, in the = white paper Analysis and Simulation of the NTP On-Wire Protocols = http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/onwire.html. There is a serious disconnect about the design intent of the protocol. = It was designed to operate with no assistive infrastructure at all. The = DNS is not necessary and there are no provision for certificate = verification other than the trusted host, for example a national time = server,. While not the original motivation for this model, it is = appropriate for the Mars spacecraft model suggested in Chapter 17 of my = book. Since the light time between Mars and Earth can be as much as 40 = minutes, access to Earth infrastructure is highly awkward. Even so, the = certificate format conforms to X.500v3 and the certificate trail is = verified as in conformant PKI practice. Your suggestion about signing the entire NTP packet has bee considered = before. However, a constraint you might have observed is that, except = for the glaring case of the cookie request, signatures are always = computed offline. Signing something in a flux of 3000 requests per = second is not an option.. Meanwhile, your suggestion on server cookie length and hash algorithm = are highly useful. Cookie length is easy to change, although it raises = backward compatibility issues. As you might have noticed in recent = documentation, selection of any hash algorithm supported by the OpenSSL = library is now possible. I suspect there is not much more to say, so I recommend these issues be = raised and discussed by the working group at an upcoming IETF meeting. I = can't volunteer to do much, as my eyesight is dwindling to nothing and = messing with code is impractical. Dave Stephen R=F6ttger wrote: >Hello everyone, > >Since the discussion about the Autokey-Protocol in June ended abruptly, >we want to inform you, that we finished our analysis of the protocol and >found several weaknesses, that render it completely useless. >Our analysis is in German, but if you are interested in it, we can >summarize the weaknesses for you. > >In addition, we came up with some changes to the protocol, that mitigate >the vulnerabilities and would like to present you a revised >Autokey-protocol. >The changes are: > >-Use the Clients Public Key used for cookie-encryption as input to the >cookie calculation. For example, calculate the Cookie as > C =3D H(PubKey, ServerSeed). > >-Change the length of Cookie and Server Seed from 32 to 128 bit. > >-Replace the Identity Schemes with a common X.509 PKI, where the Clients >are in possession of certificates of Trusted Authorities > >-Let the Signature included in extension fields cover the whole NTP-packet > >-(optional) use HMAC for MAC-calculation and switch the used >Hash-Algorithms to SHA-256 > >Regards, >Dieter Sibold and Stephen R=F6ttger >_______________________________________________ >ntpwg mailing list >ntpwg@lists.ntp.org >http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > = > _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Aug 24 13:53:14 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81AA21F8C06 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:53:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.172 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.427, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BwINsm-RYVX0 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88B1721F8BEF for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:53:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71B9F86D769 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 20:54:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D1AB86D41E for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 20:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from naeanrfkax01o.nmci.navy.mil ([138.162.5.136]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1QwKRC-00093A-2n for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 20:52:50 +0000 X-AuditID: 8aa20587-b7bbaae0000030ac-dd-4e55648e9a73 Received: from naeanrfkeg03v.nadsusea.nads.navy.mil (gate4-norfolk.nmci.navy.mil [138.162.0.44]) by (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id EB.47.12460.E84655E4; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 20:52:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from naeanrfkeb10v.nadsusea.nads.navy.mil ([10.16.20.113]) by naeanrfkeg03v.nadsusea.nads.navy.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 24 Aug 2011 16:52:29 -0400 Received: from naeanrfkeb06v.nadsusea.nads.navy.mil ([10.16.20.109]) by naeanrfkeb10v.nadsusea.nads.navy.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 24 Aug 2011 16:52:28 -0400 Received: from naeamillez04v.nadsusea.nads.navy.mil ([10.16.20.64]) by naeanrfkeb06v.nadsusea.nads.navy.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 24 Aug 2011 16:52:29 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 16:52:33 -0400 Message-ID: In-reply-to: <4DF03979.5070204@pobox.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Renamed: Interleave Questions Thread-Index: AcwmUsY9UPxXTbGcT5iOrRftdLttwg7e4w4w References: <4DF03979.5070204@pobox.com> From: "Marlow, David T CIV NSWCDD, W64" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Aug 2011 20:52:29.0102 (UTC) FILETIME=[BCA2F4E0:01CC629F] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 138.162.5.136 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: david.marlow@navy.mil X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org, tictoc@ietf.org Subject: [ntpwg] Renamed: Interleave Questions X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8271840199144060380==" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============8271840199144060380== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0FE7_01CC627E.315CFA00" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0FE7_01CC627E.315CFA00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dave, A while back in an email thread you pointed out that our ID (draft-marlow-tictoc-computer-clock-accuracy-00.txt) only addressed interleaved broadcast and did not include interleaved symmetric mode and that a lot of the detail information is in your book. We bought the book and have learned a lot particularly in section 16.6 where you have measurement data for interleave mode operation. Your Backroom LAN example is similar to the experiments we ran. We had some questions: 1) In your Backroom LAN example the GPS clock server ran in client/server mode with clients Macabre and Mort. Would you expect better accuracy if client/server mode is used (as you did) versus if interleave broadcast mode were used between this server and these two clients? 2)Similar in your Campus LAN example you used client/server mode in some of the operations versus using interleave broadcast, where is client/server mode better than interleave broadcast to use? 3) In your Backroom LAN example, Macabre and Mort ran interleaved symmetric mode between each other. Would not the dominant synchronization factor come from the GPS clock server, given its lower stratum number? Is the interleaved symmetric mode exchanges providing a secondary effect to keep these two together? Dave -----Original Message----- From: tictoc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Karen O'Donoghue Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 23:10 To: NTP Working Group; tictoc@ietf.org Subject: [TICTOC] Fwd: Re: [ntpwg] Fwd: reminder for remote participation in today's tictoc meeting Folks, This came to me personally, and I neglected to send it on to the ntp and tictoc wg lists. My apologies for the delay. The question before us is whether or not the interleave capability should be properly documented and where the resources will come from to complete the effort. Karen -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Fwd: [TICTOC] reminder for remote participation in today's tictoc meeting Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:18:43 +0000 From: David L. Mills To: kodonog@pobox.com Karen, The following is in response to the ID you distributed. I offer it as a candidate for distribution to th eWG members. Dave This internet draft describes experiments using the interleaved broadcast mode recently incorporated in the NTP reference implementation. The experiments do not include the interleaved symmetric mode, which provides similar functionality in peer-to-peer configurations. For reference, these modes, their relevance to PTP and related information are discussed in detail in Chapters 15 through 17 of the book "Network Time Synchronization - the Network Time Protocol on Earth and in Space, Second Edition, CRC Press 2011, as cited on my web page www.eedis.udel.edu/~mills . However, most of the information relevant to the followings discussion can be found in the white papers at www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp.html . Of particular interest are the documents "Analysis and Simulation of the NTP On-Wire Protocol" and "Security Analysis of the NTP Protocol." Both of these documents represent an update since t he book was published late last year. Readers may wonder why these documents have not been published as an update to the protocol specification RFC-5905, which would have been the expectation several years ago in the adolescent Internet. However, the effort necessary to publish an ID with figures, tables and equations is nowadays simply unacceptable. My experience with RFC-5905 and RFC-5906 over the last five years of publishing effort is not sustainable. Thus, unless some collaboration, perhaps the TICTOC working group, chose to publish them as IDs, I will not commit that adventure myself. First some nomenclature that may help in the following discussion. Timestamps captured for the clock discipline are classed as hardstamps, drivestamps and softstamps. Softstamps are captured during the course of user-space processing; they may be corrupted by operating system and device latencies, as well as transmission delays. Drivestamps are captured during the packet interrupt routines, so are much less affected by operating system scheduling and competition with other programs. Hardstamps are captured by dedicated hardware means, typically in the PHY layer of the network interface card (NIC). While the details vary, the typical intercept point is the media independent interface (MII), which monitors the frame level interface on a character by character basis. The capture means is usuallt a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) that parses the packeet, inserts timestamp data and recomputes the UDP checksum. The interleaved capability was originally not intended for NTP, but for the Proximity-1 protocol specified by the Consultive Committee on Space Data systems (CCSDS). The Proximity-1 protocol is designed for communication between spacecraft in the vicinity of Mars and for future missions in the vicinity of the Moon. Space data links are often operated at very low data rates compared to typical Ethernet links. Typical rates range from 1 kb/s to 256 kb/s with very different data rates in each direction. Due to various queuing and transmission operations, the output delay can reach 30 s, so it is imparities that timestamps be captured close to the PHY layer. In the Proximity-1 desing, hardstamps are captured upon the passage of the ASM code combination at the beginning of each transmitted frame.. Queuing and transmission delays are not the only contributors to space data link delay. Reed-Solomon and convolutional encoding delays can be a large contribution to the link delay; however, these delays are a constant contribution to the lightwave transmission delay. These contributions - up to many seconds - can dwarf the lightwave transmission delays. In the NTP interleaved design, drivestamps are captured in the device interrupt routine - on input immediately after the frame has been received and before copying to an input buffer; on output shortly after the frame has been transmitted and before the buffer is released for the following input or output frame. This can become rather awkward in the case of NICs of the PCNET architecture, as data are copied directly from user space to device buffers directed by DMA descriptors. Drivestamps have been used on input for many years, but for output this is possible only using the interleaved modes. The result avoids the latencies due to the message digest computation, Autokey protocol data units, output queuing and frame transmissions, typically some 10-40 microseconds. It should be obvious from the documents that a primary motivation for the NTP interleaved design was protection from network errors and intruder attack. The detailed analysis and simulation are designed to demonstrate resistance to common corruptions such as dropped or duplicate packets and possible bogus attacks. The NTP design includes a four-level security model, the lower two levels might be considered for a PTP application. This is one of the most important difference between the PTP and NTP protocol designs; however, the NTP design might be considered overkill in a sheltered, isolated Ethernet network. Careful observers may notice an interesting anomaly with the interleaved broadcast mode. The preliminary volley intended to measure the roundtrip time uses basic mode, not interleaved mode. The reason for this requires some explanation. In times of old, the dominant concern was the 6-bone, an international consortium of multicast application developers. In that context with historic multicast configurations, including DVMRP and PIM, the multicast spanning tree was far different than the unicast spanning tree. Therefore, the preliminary volley was important to estimate the offset of the multicast server to the multicast client and thus the apparent one-way delay. In principle, with adroit protocolmanship, it would be possible to change the protocol to measure the interleaved roundtrip delay, which would be more appropriate for modern high-speed Ethernet networks. Karen O'Donoghue wrote: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [TICTOC] reminder for remote participation in today's tictoc meeting Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:56:35 +0200 From: Karen O'Donoghue Reply-To: odonoghue@isoc.org Organization: ISOC To: tictoc@ietf.org, NTP Working Group Folks, This is a reminder that the tictoc working group will meet today from 17:40 - 19:40 CEST (15:40 - 17:40 UTC). The tools agenda for the IETF meeting (http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/80/) has links for the drafts, presentations, jabber chat room, and audio streaming to facilitate remote participation. Regards, Karen _______________________________________________ TICTOC mailing list TICTOC@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc ________________________________ _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg ------=_NextPart_000_0FE7_01CC627E.315CFA00 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIISuDCCA3Aw ggJYoAMCAQICAQUwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwWzELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxGDAWBgNVBAoTD1UuUy4g R292ZXJubWVudDEMMAoGA1UECxMDRG9EMQwwCgYDVQQLEwNQS0kxFjAUBgNVBAMTDURvRCBSb290 IENBIDIwHhcNMDQxMjEzMTUwMDEwWhcNMjkxMjA1MTUwMDEwWjBbMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYG A1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQwwCgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEWMBQGA1UE AxMNRG9EIFJvb3QgQ0EgMjCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMAswfaNO6z/ PzzWcb64dCIH7HBBFfyrQOMHqsHD2J/+2kw6vz/I2Ch7SzYBwKxFJcPSDgqPhRhkED0aE3Aqb47X 3I2Ts0EPOCHNravCPSoF01cRNw3NjFH5k+PMRkkhjhS0zcsUPjjNcjHuqxLyZeo0LlZd/+5jdctt upE0/J7z9C0cvlDEQt9ZiP9qs/qobD3LVnFxBZa7n4DlgEVZZ0Gw68OtYKSAdQYXnA70Q+CZDhv7 f/WzzLKBgrH9MsG4vkGkZLVgOlpRMIzO3kEsGUdcSRBkuXSph0GvfW66wbihv2UxOgRn+bW7jpKK AGO4seaMOF+D/1DVO6Jda7IQzGMCAwEAAaM/MD0wHQYDVR0OBBYEFEl0uwxeunr+AlTve6DGlcYJ gHCWMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIBhjAPBgNVHRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQCYkY0/ ici79cBpcyk7Nay6swh2PXAJkumERCEBfRR2G+5RbB2NFTctezFp9JpEuK9GzDT6I8sDJxnSgyF1 K+fgG5km3IRAleio0sz2WFxm7z9KlxCCHboKot1bBiudp2RO6y4BNaS0PxOtVeTVc6hpmxHxmPIx Hm9A1Ph4n46RoG9wBJBmqgYrzuF6krV94eDRluehOi3MsZ0fBUTth5nTTRpwOcEEDOV+2fGv1yAO 8SJ6JaRzmcw/pAcnlqiile2CuRbTnguHwsHyiPVi32jfx7xpUe2xXNxUVCkPCTmarAPB2wxNrm8K ehZJ8b+R0jiU0/aVLLdsyUK2jcqQjYXZMIIErzCCA5egAwIBAgIDKnOPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUA MF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRgwFgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAKBgNVBAsTA0RvRDEM MAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgwFgYDVQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMjMwHhcNMTEwODE2MDAwMDAwWhcN MTQwODE1MjM1OTU5WjB1MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQww CgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEMMAoGA1UECxMDVVNOMSIwIAYDVQQDExlNQVJMT1cu REFWSUQuVC4xMjI5NTE3NzQ3MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA1hUT+J59 rmaSpQBhjLIa9nYG4fJ5ByHukGxpBFu1iy1apXJgyMZlgP5d0AflQTVCC2BCTTt35DN8Cl4vQax2 klkF3v6s40QHq1TOwnmZxy+0GbQYVIbQaCzh1VTZJmH5pzWMUQcON9v/9yOQPJuj9xMWhWN3/plA thMIA+ngwtU67lO8yYAfNrnDQmGob/ARQtnvLzIxM5l7J+r37rwmEnRUSt+wKc7fw4AOx8/jr0DF 3XzBSZ2Yp/k8WiOtZlnbFs6WMJ1b/qfg/lzNiA5S1FMU9ruZ3onQ4bZVQIWz3Get2razmnAgvC2f QSMGLyVOO7qNSlfGzXPXwEQIq42HUwIDAQABo4IBXjCCAVowHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUW5YtMaXh9ppq XF6BUTZhHpYkGdEwOgYDVR0fBDMwMTAvoC2gK4YpaHR0cDovL2NybC5kaXNhLm1pbC9jcmwvRE9E RU1BSUxDQV8yMy5jcmwwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgUgMCMGA1UdIAQcMBowCwYJYIZIAWUCAQsJMAsG CWCGSAFlAgELEzAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUOx867pREXtQ5X7SlZIb9zZs6mNIwaAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEXDBa MDYGCCsGAQUFBzAChipodHRwOi8vY3JsLmRpc2EubWlsL3NpZ24vRE9ERU1BSUxDQV8yMy5jZXIw IAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGFGh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLmRpc2EubWlsMCAGA1UdEQQZMBeBFWRhdmlkLm1hcmxv d0BuYXZ5Lm1pbDAbBgNVHQkEFDASMBAGCCsGAQUFBwkEMQQTAlVTMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IB AQCdB6W990/yk7O3DGDHbsEVmGUE9EZytv41BfekZ8MCL+dgJRL2Rym94HrXvqg7Kipammw9qoVc 5COR6Sgy98i6eVpmxNiSiOsSgRJFoo05AK4fI0JDx85PxELINmiW6k7e9TH1MXHjMWl+QthSAOrY QNIItUsAlDBEzyy9bEoSRw86NNDoB05Qyb3m4whuBJw85WHQwh2hIVgT8lYXS8B1G2byoQG+GZid TEAit6LJd7M6A5DoDF/8pTdzZzZW/r5xNEJOCHUkelTZsm0ghiK8t29YGmikX33rMMkkXGY8IZWJ +J2cF98X7ShYog4gVtEA/SwKlOFqMZXOcA6Q0jVLMIIE+jCCA+KgAwIBAgIDKnOOMA0GCSqGSIb3 DQEBBQUAMF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRgwFgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAKBgNVBAsT A0RvRDEMMAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgwFgYDVQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMjMwHhcNMTEwODE2MDAw MDAwWhcNMTQwODE1MjM1OTU5WjB1MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5t ZW50MQwwCgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEMMAoGA1UECxMDVVNOMSIwIAYDVQQDExlN QVJMT1cuREFWSUQuVC4xMjI5NTE3NzQ3MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEA 2y1AK/aiN3PY41xnuEAMRepXNeX1oiy61HRX9M0iP0D8kBLt1IAHmeJHnhS1Nm3T8vV8/bfp3Pwb m2cGMLk9bTp1uimq9Vj6okF4wskAp9LBi9VkeC1q1t03XaiLdeclry/10fuzZfbR9PmsLPgJwTQ6 H/qw63p29faXMbgkVAJqPp3WQPGuZhPZGG+CVUyetesBg1jA9DHONqv9YXH7xUFZoEEm07uAElds rwz4w/7wdzD8d2VX1B+Ux8k1PQCiIsKzIzqwxYIz0+6JeMy0xh/hldjK/PJsUC+gHXTA7617Ymqt QDeT1xyMDIbMPGqh/LkDlIz3sVtxNGj/BnzOnQIDAQABo4IBqTCCAaUwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUW5Yt MaXh9ppqXF6BUTZhHpYkGdEwOgYDVR0fBDMwMTAvoC2gK4YpaHR0cDovL2NybC5kaXNhLm1pbC9j cmwvRE9ERU1BSUxDQV8yMy5jcmwwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgbAMCMGA1UdIAQcMBowCwYJYIZIAWUC AQsJMAsGCWCGSAFlAgELEzAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUEpX7sw4yaww2Xb0+z1Q8mNkmr/UwaAYIKwYBBQUH AQEEXDBaMDYGCCsGAQUFBzAChipodHRwOi8vY3JsLmRpc2EubWlsL3NpZ24vRE9ERU1BSUxDQV8y My5jZXIwIAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGFGh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLmRpc2EubWlsMEAGA1UdEQQ5MDeBFWRhdmlk Lm1hcmxvd0BuYXZ5Lm1pbKAeBgorBgEEAYI3FAIDoBAMDjEyMjk1MTc3NDdAbWlsMBsGA1UdCQQU MBIwEAYIKwYBBQUHCQQxBBMCVVMwKQYDVR0lBCIwIAYKKwYBBAGCNxQCAgYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsG AQUFBwMEMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQBNIsaVvCpUVHf1ebSv+qKDPvvkV1890lMCx9W0ohbw KxlFcwxLs5R1JN5jrXThLQW25dZp8m+6Z/UeT4LyJeRdlxebOqPckz1na+dmcLTwY9ec6Uos46zU qOLFP+mmPAuie+YUQnRNk2V2ixexwhRlfdOYteIf8Kt0aFlOOqFRrIz29EedSV6D3Y6F5DMIGixq RkdudhF0lKzauuAHwkmHgFVdPBnktqOBjiyLvrHjn1vtPBtxNbuHwd2fbECsGvrhAvPSza9DZ7MD kx6alzPemLFSlwjcPCzeznZn6/t8Jjh5YiZ33mm6jT+vhnFqmFM1k2TLxkihFfwIWUc5PZGnMIIF jzCCBHegAwIBAgIBSTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBbMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UEChMPVS5T LiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQwwCgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEWMBQGA1UEAxMNRG9EIFJv b3QgQ0EgMjAeFw0wOTAxMjYxNjQzMjVaFw0xNTAxMjUxNjQzMjVaMF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRgw FgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAKBgNVBAsTA0RvRDEMMAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgwFgYD VQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMjMwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQC99ClN V5NEAweNBh+u+jw0VjRA57EYf2wlbheFBQUj6fbFUCVPgeQjMEJxaer3uJ73b6zeXar81uCNvGvu fZmVIjuzWMaxUhyyqL8xQCIG/o0o0qlQVWoeB3D4pkjJbf2u7L6AbD3PkNQHok6RFAO/V1kS9XTe Q5ZaWrnPuUfof9COsPjY6Us0XsxLF44C8BK/8gRsHRO/qxzeDQnsy5tW7dmQ55alfyZlYcHEm2gk pc3SeSNvwzzBhR5I+T5QcWKgQbpyRKVD46Vybs3Oq9rLhNIavx9uchE/LZkfbbD7BTDO5uwjKmVH H3icDZ9MJHVsdtLVOxdEFrKKKEjXuQ2vAgMBAAGjggJaMIICVjAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAYYwHwYD VR0jBBgwFoAUSXS7DF66ev4CVO97oMaVxgmAcJYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFFuWLTGl4faaalxegVE2YR6W JBnRMAwGA1UdJAQFMAOAAQAwEgYDVR0TAQH/BAgwBgEB/wIBADCBnwYDVR0gBIGXMIGUMAsGCWCG SAFlAgELBTALBglghkgBZQIBCwkwCwYJYIZIAWUCAQsKMAsGCWCGSAFlAgELEjALBglghkgBZQIB CxMwCwYJYIZIAWUCAQsUMAwGCmCGSAFlAwIBAwYwDAYKYIZIAWUDAgEDBzAMBgpghkgBZQMCAQMI MAwGCmCGSAFlAwIBAw0wDAYKYIZIAWUDAgEDETA/BgNVHR8EODA2MDSgMqAwhi5odHRwOi8vY3Js LmRpc2EubWlsL2dldGNybD9Eb0QlMjBSb290JTIwQ0ElMjAyMIH+BggrBgEFBQcBAQSB8TCB7jA/ BggrBgEFBQcwAoYzaHR0cDovL2NybC5kaXNhLm1pbC9nZXRJc3N1ZWRUbz9Eb0QlMjBSb290JTIw Q0ElMjAyMCAGCCsGAQUFBzABhhRodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5kaXNhLm1pbDCBiAYIKwYBBQUHMAKGfGxk YXA6Ly9jcmwuZ2RzLmRpc2EubWlsL2NuJTNkRG9EJTIwUm9vdCUyMENBJTIwMiUyY291JTNkUEtJ JTJjb3UlM2REb0QlMmNvJTNkVS5TLiUyMEdvdmVybm1lbnQlMmNjJTNkVVM/Y0FDZXJ0aWZpY2F0 ZTtiaW5hcnkwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAD729uQP1FfNvu3pxEVS2kVbGKY2OTAKtn7r9on8 p2Iusz+DfeESGobTY5T0dPTOcZfq+8RqOl3imaesw+I2+Oh49NjEUO6KgVX6ioNlDMXyTczpH497 Rt0DCpzq4qxjdwfLMlTbCFWyWAB9XKa5FjxfZW0vBc5aP5rbScuSo6HZb1HU9cAIwaM5W9BBY4HE lGVkYylMXfBfcYdqnZaS5ceC/S101wJsyuLboLPbcdUOhj4+F4m9bkIXG7T2OfkaveYuLJsONzsQ X0T+e7WUWNZxJeU50SO6NADBQ2249A6Xq7Iw9oinjo6KEAOEdNyuTfnlmXQaqaIKbQsHFZTFP2Mx ggMyMIIDLgIBATBkMF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRgwFgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAK BgNVBAsTA0RvRDEMMAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgwFgYDVQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMjMCAypzjjAJ BgUrDgMCGgUAoIIBozAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0x MTA4MjQyMDUyMjJaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBQumeO+Ak7FI2VOs78Z44AegFw92jBYBgkqhkiG 9w0BCQ8xSzBJMAoGCCqGSIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG9w0D AgIBKDAHBgUrDgMCGjAKBggqhkiG9w0CBTBzBgkrBgEEAYI3EAQxZjBkMF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVT MRgwFgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAKBgNVBAsTA0RvRDEMMAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgw FgYDVQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMjMCAypzjzB1BgsqhkiG9w0BCRACCzFmoGQwXTELMAkGA1UE BhMCVVMxGDAWBgNVBAoTD1UuUy4gR292ZXJubWVudDEMMAoGA1UECxMDRG9EMQwwCgYDVQQLEwNQ S0kxGDAWBgNVBAMTD0RPRCBFTUFJTCBDQS0yMwIDKnOPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIBADzapFU0 xfwMS2F87ylu0Lzn+XfXZ0Flivor8sikxEN/h2Mi3xEtcstNhDF6PkFjSb24yN7GzlXA8lQdTyFQ KQMI8zME4Qbf2n8KrdyGO60K1fRBUArbdglUIKxdFj7rGr2YvfUx283vBdsnhmSbDmD7wvDtUhxl IYDdrdmtvbwg7vbLDTYuj7J70NuD2fGevI/ZuM3q+gJoydRJRs1s/26Ui9a8HWHQ0fTnxPfKYO3k zVt8Hp49vlGjBF5OyoYp4fDQQRA+xIyZDLBH3LmrJbZPEhihFJKWuIDssP852bRsmh2GWtjA0w5Y TlIUpFWF2JfLhDfjkttbVhi5IT+aTVcAAAAAAAA= ------=_NextPart_000_0FE7_01CC627E.315CFA00-- --===============8271840199144060380== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg --===============8271840199144060380==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Fri Aug 26 11:00:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-ntp-archives-ahFae6za@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E4AE21F8538 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 11:00:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3gtDqJ7knFYV for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 11:00:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1045921F85E3 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 11:00:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [149.20.68.7]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 430EC86D78D for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 18:01:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (mail1.ntp.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff7:1::5]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D47786D41E for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 18:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from louie.udel.edu ([128.4.40.12] helo=mail.eecis.udel.edu) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtp (Exim 4.75 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Qx0hU-000Aqz-OR for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 18:00:28 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.2] (pool-173-75-253-165.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [173.75.253.165]) (Authenticated sender: mills@mail.eecis.udel.edu) by mail.eecis.udel.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6AD3EE; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 14:00:15 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E57DF0B.3010407@udel.edu> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 17:59:39 +0000 From: "David L. Mills" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Marlow, David T CIV NSWCDD, W64" References: <4DF03979.5070204@pobox.com> In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 128.4.40.12 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mills@udel.edu X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org, tictoc@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Renamed: Interleave Questions X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org David, The campus and backroom experiments were designed to measure the magnitude of the queuing and transmission components of the roundtrip delay and only secondarily to maintain synchronization.. In any case, measurement of these delays in client/server mode is not possible, as the server keeps no state. The GPS receivers used in the experiments do not support either broadcast mode or symmetric mode in either the basic or interleaved variants. While measurement of the output queuing and transmission delays is possible in interleaved modes, it is not possible to measure the input processing delay, which is significant in the Solaris operating system implementation. I suspect this can be determined using the Solaris DTrace measurement tools, but so far this has not been done. Dave,, David T CIV NSWCDD, W64 wrote: >Dave, > A while back in an email thread you pointed out that our ID (draft-marlow-tictoc-computer-clock-accuracy-00.txt) only addressed interleaved broadcast and did not include interleaved symmetric mode and that a lot of the detail information is in your book. We bought the book and have learned a lot particularly in section 16.6 where you have measurement data for interleave mode operation. Your Backroom LAN example is similar to the experiments we ran. We had some questions: > >1) In your Backroom LAN example the GPS clock server ran in client/server mode with clients Macabre and Mort. Would you expect better accuracy if client/server mode is used (as you did) versus if interleave broadcast mode were used between this server and these two clients? > >2)Similar in your Campus LAN example you used client/server mode in some of the operations versus using interleave broadcast, where is client/server mode better than interleave broadcast to use? > >3) In your Backroom LAN example, Macabre and Mort ran interleaved symmetric mode between each other. Would not the dominant synchronization factor come from the GPS clock server, given its lower stratum number? Is the interleaved symmetric mode exchanges providing a secondary effect to keep these two together? > > Dave > > >-----Original Message----- >From: tictoc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tictoc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Karen O'Donoghue >Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 23:10 >To: NTP Working Group; tictoc@ietf.org >Subject: [TICTOC] Fwd: Re: [ntpwg] Fwd: reminder for remote participation in today's tictoc meeting > >Folks, > >This came to me personally, and I neglected to send it on to the ntp and tictoc wg lists. My apologies for the delay. The question before us is whether or not the interleave capability should be properly documented and where the resources will come from to complete the effort. > >Karen > >-------- Original Message -------- >Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Fwd: [TICTOC] reminder for remote participation in today's tictoc meeting >Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:18:43 +0000 >From: David L. Mills >To: kodonog@pobox.com > > >Karen, > >The following is in response to the ID you distributed. I offer it as a candidate for distribution to th eWG members. > >Dave > >This internet draft describes experiments using the interleaved broadcast mode recently incorporated in the NTP reference implementation. The experiments do not include the interleaved symmetric mode, which provides similar functionality in peer-to-peer configurations. For reference, these modes, their relevance to PTP and related information are discussed in detail in Chapters 15 through 17 of the book "Network Time Synchronization - the Network Time Protocol on Earth and in Space, Second Edition, CRC Press 2011, as cited on my web page www.eedis.udel.edu/~mills . However, most of the information relevant to the followings discussion can be found in the white papers at www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp.html . Of particular interest are the documents "Analysis and Simulation of the NTP On-Wire Protocol" and "Security Analysis of the NTP Protocol." Both of these documents represent an update since th! >! >e book was published late last year. > >Readers may wonder why these documents have not been published as an update to the protocol specification RFC-5905, which would have been the expectation several years ago in the adolescent Internet. However, the effort necessary to publish an ID with figures, tables and equations is nowadays simply unacceptable. My experience with RFC-5905 and RFC-5906 over the last five years of publishing effort is not sustainable. Thus, unless some collaboration, perhaps the TICTOC working group, chose to publish them as IDs, I will not commit that adventure myself. > >First some nomenclature that may help in the following discussion. Timestamps captured for the clock discipline are classed as hardstamps, drivestamps and softstamps. Softstamps are captured during the course of user-space processing; they may be corrupted by operating system and device latencies, as well as transmission delays. Drivestamps are captured during the packet interrupt routines, so are much less affected by operating system scheduling and competition with other programs. Hardstamps are captured by dedicated hardware means, typically in the PHY layer of the network interface card (NIC). While the details vary, the typical intercept point is the media independent interface (MII), which monitors the frame level interface on a character by character basis. The capture means is usuallt a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) that parses the packeet, inserts timestamp data and recomputes the UDP checksum. > >The interleaved capability was originally not intended for NTP, but for the Proximity-1 protocol specified by the Consultive Committee on Space Data systems (CCSDS). The Proximity-1 protocol is designed for communication between spacecraft in the vicinity of Mars and for future missions in the vicinity of the Moon. Space data links are often operated at very low data rates compared to typical Ethernet links. Typical rates range from 1 kb/s to 256 kb/s with very different data rates in each direction. Due to various queuing and transmission operations, the output delay can reach 30 s, so it is imparities that timestamps be captured close to the PHY layer. In the Proximity-1 desing, hardstamps are captured upon the passage of the ASM code combination at the beginning of each transmitted frame.. > >Queuing and transmission delays are not the only contributors to space data link delay. Reed-Solomon and convolutional encoding delays can be a large contribution to the link delay; however, these delays are a constant contribution to the lightwave transmission delay. These contributions - up to many seconds - can dwarf the lightwave transmission delays. > >In the NTP interleaved design, drivestamps are captured in the device interrupt routine - on input immediately after the frame has been received and before copying to an input buffer; on output shortly after the frame has been transmitted and before the buffer is released for the following input or output frame. This can become rather awkward in the case of NICs of the PCNET architecture, as data are copied directly from user space to device buffers directed by DMA descriptors. Drivestamps have been used on input for many years, but for output this is possible only using the interleaved modes. The result avoids the latencies due to the message digest computation, Autokey protocol data units, output queuing and frame transmissions, typically some 10-40 microseconds. > >It should be obvious from the documents that a primary motivation for the NTP interleaved design was protection from network errors and intruder attack. The detailed analysis and simulation are designed to demonstrate resistance to common corruptions such as dropped or duplicate packets and possible bogus attacks. The NTP design includes a four-level security model, the lower two levels might be considered for a PTP application. This is one of the most important difference between the PTP and NTP protocol designs; however, the NTP design might be considered overkill in a sheltered, isolated Ethernet network. > >Careful observers may notice an interesting anomaly with the interleaved broadcast mode. The preliminary volley intended to measure the roundtrip time uses basic mode, not interleaved mode. The reason for this requires some explanation. In times of old, the dominant concern was the 6-bone, an international consortium of multicast application developers. In that context with historic multicast configurations, including DVMRP and PIM, the multicast spanning tree was far different than the unicast spanning tree. Therefore, the preliminary volley was important to estimate the offset of the multicast server to the multicast client and thus the apparent one-way delay. In principle, with adroit protocolmanship, it would be possible to change the protocol to measure the interleaved roundtrip delay, which would be more appropriate for modern high-speed Ethernet networks. > >Karen O'Donoghue wrote: > > > > > -------- Original Message -------- >Subject: [TICTOC] reminder for remote participation in today's tictoc meeting >Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 09:56:35 +0200 >From: Karen O'Donoghue >Reply-To: odonoghue@isoc.org >Organization: ISOC >To: tictoc@ietf.org, NTP Working Group > > > Folks, > > This is a reminder that the tictoc working group will meet today from > 17:40 - 19:40 CEST (15:40 - 17:40 UTC). The tools agenda for the IETF > meeting (http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/80/) has links for the drafts, > presentations, jabber chat room, and audio streaming to facilitate > remote participation. > > Regards, > Karen > > _______________________________________________ > TICTOC mailing list > TICTOC@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc > > >________________________________ > > > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > > > > _______________________________________________ ntpwg mailing list ntpwg@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg