From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 1 09:27:10 2017 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 0E7F712961F for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:27:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.08 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.08 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.229, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fzt-DNV62-UK for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:27:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C313129613 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:27:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6DF486DB2D for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:27:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E023486DAB4 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:19:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cj7uK-000NCu-1B for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 17:19:27 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id n186so78595646qkb.3 for ; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:19:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=VdSHeHbZxRsL/6HZIH6I0mCDwa+xGzev/CH91YlFi9I=; b=bfCexwW6UUxBGyoncFuaqEQzTXWLqW4UyOOzJCTqf8of/AFH+ep9fuocu6bzqeFmXl 91Sh0UpvJLDsQEDapcbIR8uHaFRZY79cfZb8go5f5PiFhK+jBpEfxgMXa3lU6GuWeFCg HrjDCiNqVqjcCmNdS7YKHNzT3fVDZuaM6Md+d8cV6v0U0MG6Nds5m3shXtsB0w0mGd3m BdAUPc/jAOfGPHRXth6FU8yFGwanUbpzWatan3a5A8CZIctgkZqyFFSPX8m9DICZzUCL gEUT75UH+WV+BGXkQR+vl1IQcrAwcOtvm/wN3EcJgv0ytfytISb3OIV9D9HYSCk8ZvIF cqjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=VdSHeHbZxRsL/6HZIH6I0mCDwa+xGzev/CH91YlFi9I=; b=ty7eVP9f3bo+1rnJDd9C7fRJZ5p/ODMN/3ky4Lth8jTuMe+s/2EC9V0GmaV+Fk6Jn+ aMOdrtjyjz7GIgtQX0GFsYNs77BWpqsxFZguwnNWJN246WadNBu/eCYy2MjjKAdH0UlD 4T2DlA856ehvY+1GpyGkeUPr5duQP2XT60f5oYsXT0QZXK9YW8M8m4Aznpg3d3BwIxEj QomSxvUKFYWdDC79fqjc8nReV9ZlNzTlLo+nPCobmRzEr3owuLU25kjsZyvzi+rmVrgb sMjv53+1LhSRivFUCxbLABKTe1kxZHKPhZemF/aYUeNashzfSjRFnn7L8tQ8P99FYxcl Urqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39n2NA8V1Aa+evowdWAAkE1grKGSh6fCQFxanPPT99C2pLqGGaNNAVHYkjFDMOejGZODqkxlUSwEI6awXA== X-Received: by 10.55.177.133 with SMTP id a127mr10851264qkf.301.1488388759236; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:19:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.33 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:19:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Daniel Franke Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:19:18 -0500 Message-ID: To: ntpwg X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.174 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Nonce woes X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 8/23/16, Daniel Franke wrote: > That leaves the AES_SIV_CMAC family, which seems to offer all the > properties we want: misuse-resistance and unlimited nonce length. The > construction has a security proof and is well-studied. Unfortunately, > there seem to be very few implementations: the only one I can find is > part of hostapd and I have no idea if it has ever been audited (not > that this would be a huge deal to do -- it's 188 lines of pretty > straightforward code). After reviewing the hostapd implementation of AES-SIV I concluded it was unsuitable for use in NTS and wrote my own, which I released last night. https://github.com/dfoxfranke/libaes_siv _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 1 09:30:28 2017 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 5AE561204D9 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:30:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h5GsrK0IwXty for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:30:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D603312961F for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:30:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93ED786DB85 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B09E986DAB4 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:29:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-f181.google.com ([209.85.223.181]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cj849-000NHZ-Ls for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 17:29:36 +0000 Received: by mail-io0-f181.google.com with SMTP id f84so34827050ioj.0 for ; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:29:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=Ivs8dnH7Omj7ZJzPVEbAWKua5PoWo0qMdPvzKzkf60A=; b=OBu5W5l5DfOw2gpy2Uc7u7r0qdbPN2B54hF6/w4ug+uD5qBElByhcWIEDHxPONRTOt tP0eoUSbhJJUAyfQFxco4U212vl7Qipt+A52gd0uk32FQknPJmrS8/8zUvhJWYLimBUV 4w2FK1glzpV8FGeioU1bnGc7hW56Vn+us/wOa0U34u3AdiOuLq94/N61XlrfxFqIad56 J3W+5nsVmItsn2Vsmf22J2mLrXqOcrRdHyO0RRnY2+osgdBbKfhBjEgVKcAsRGCgq/A5 UbLgy2ge1sF2Ll3lO1Lsa++GBz1ENJv1HULtyNLE6+l/jzx2mlzANsvypBNVizQuoKk6 tq+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ivs8dnH7Omj7ZJzPVEbAWKua5PoWo0qMdPvzKzkf60A=; b=FlrJaWFDw/rizcjCjjA41WsPBbBetRf3VJBZ3VfDkxXFWGAqCfKYSNrz/nykT2N5HZ jHpx5gc2ZYstL0RvkXJIwXsTp+n0/kO/H7Hy2pUxbUcQmcntw0HosgBIqXU2f8TlxCBs VNI7CXRuAokHw+Lyj1dR0KKEi/6+m1cSarifIhbfta2Mki/cOqo4toB3MemsGvJrKIqB BzeDA/DtPaBG7RGczfC3bx1+RHOrwFXgFrCRQW+ALyXIo2O+Y9oOofFOYrpWNgx2tHAk NiC+mR32WOA91X6DfD0iR9A4KnmgeAovNb5mso/hmq0MevVcb0sj8JwLNGLf9gqG/JZC duMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nJXrdZZExRimSTgAe+Er1b/wEaji+M7/iouvqkWqtSzR4Qb0ba8MnFFS9O6rOEb2XsC5SlOVb76qlV8g== X-Received: by 10.107.129.75 with SMTP id c72mr7715060iod.23.1488389369107; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:29:29 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.141.197 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:28:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Sharon Goldberg Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:28:48 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4XNefdW6IfO-1t6moZvYyXf5HSM Message-ID: To: Daniel Franke X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.223.181 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sharon.goldbe@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Nonce woes X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7798672366376562747==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============7798672366376562747== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f99b0a221050549aea7fe --001a113f99b0a221050549aea7fe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Nice! But why is unsuitable? On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: > On 8/23/16, Daniel Franke wrote: > > That leaves the AES_SIV_CMAC family, which seems to offer all the > > properties we want: misuse-resistance and unlimited nonce length. The > > construction has a security proof and is well-studied. Unfortunately, > > there seem to be very few implementations: the only one I can find is > > part of hostapd and I have no idea if it has ever been audited (not > > that this would be a huge deal to do -- it's 188 lines of pretty > > straightforward code). > > After reviewing the hostapd implementation of AES-SIV I concluded it > was unsuitable for use in NTS and wrote my own, which I released last > night. > > https://github.com/dfoxfranke/libaes_siv > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > > -- Sharon Goldberg Computer Science, Boston University http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe --001a113f99b0a221050549aea7fe Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Nice! But why is unsuitable?

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Danie= l Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/23/16, Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> wrote:
> That leaves the AES_SIV_CMAC family, which seems to offer all the
> properties we want: misuse-resistance and unlimited nonce length. The<= br> > construction has a security proof and is well-studied. Unfortunately,<= br> > there seem to be very few implementations: the only one I can find is<= br> > part of hostapd and I have no idea if it has ever been audited (not > that this would be a huge deal to do -- it's 188 lines of pretty > straightforward code).

After reviewing the hostapd implementation of AES-SIV I concluded it=
was unsuitable for use in NTS and wrote my own, which I released last
night.

https://github.com/dfoxfranke/libaes_siv
______________________________= _________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg




--
Sharon Goldberg
= Computer Science, Boston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe
--001a113f99b0a221050549aea7fe-- --===============7798672366376562747== 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 --===============7798672366376562747==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 1 09:43:51 2017 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 9A21312962B for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:43:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.08 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.08 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.229, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Id0Vfs5YMVY for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:43:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD0331294A9 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:43:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6731A86DB35 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:43:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7442386DAB4 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:34:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f171.google.com ([209.85.220.171]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cj88y-000NKu-F7 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 17:34:36 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f171.google.com with SMTP id s186so81422530qkb.1 for ; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:34:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZuQ1awpE8+OELSijI3ovxqhZN4ImEjXQJXoAIPHWzX0=; b=k1z+I+Wxq2oLtUG5OUsBi7uHEXx7lcED+v66L20yjF4USYJgX6dQwgZ2UsFxebw4kW jsHiDzBuIHS/rrH31KMbiYUUkZ4XBckCRGjnrH0SS5Qbs3bLGn9FyorlEV4DhD51uLX9 OowyKa+DwtY+rZ1JuemoZjifn3a4LkW7OWKdzO+qBc0Vmgu+FzrpnimVazZcVxkaizNV GyP/EqLTFU16s4b0VqGCNB4UUeVFxDQbkZf7m2VeLivTg6eAmBsC5vjApJV2kIb3/UCK ud7QfxOgo3M7hjtV7xqWjYQlAXQkuZYcIna9L2PUySbLo5pyvdMNtKr99xBqoKUFPYSY DtHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZuQ1awpE8+OELSijI3ovxqhZN4ImEjXQJXoAIPHWzX0=; b=F1FydM8aJrVx/Z7wQB0HeI+6LofHwCfqMtHVmHTY5zOU/K3WdmAlq6s7sUwGASTUgB YRKw0BnyiZEFec/bSKvVTCd2ZxfsMBVg/9vIVDuOSodZjaJb8q0Ty3JpoxKIKfDfQPL5 lymzKe4tl8ICBTYR8BCkPSc/ctuCUaAU7sXVK8PDsInQznhZl7uhRy3eYX6PIgtdkBGa yvgtT/K9NOCKwfd4JSU58KH+xucgBUzl97u1m/0gpYhr3JcrLSWNu/TLqFgPl8609WHU 7r/WV5lYbibu6ugV7CRBY7rbjk4xg9hcs4JAcmG10glxtOfUzUx2nWsLPtVpBoIm+jFN C9gA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mF/rquR3AcOAm7Kza/QLQnWNR62HanRGVaZLEWpVs3vhIhe3t2mHoRHBuqMSahW3D1ulH/j9TBeuqLxQ== X-Received: by 10.55.18.232 with SMTP id 101mr10415486qks.10.1488389667826; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:34:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.33 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 09:34:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Daniel Franke Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:34:27 -0500 Message-ID: To: Sharon Goldberg X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.171 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Nonce woes X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/1/17, Sharon Goldberg wrote: > Nice! But why is unsuitable? Performance issues, branching on secrets, and dependence on too much other hostapd-specific code. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 2 19:15:32 2017 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 347AE12965E for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:15:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.079 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.079 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.229, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4VCllCKc_wwW for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:15:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 246DF12711D for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 19:15:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C13C186DB08 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 03:15:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1119286D76A for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2017 15:54:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ua0-f179.google.com ([209.85.217.179]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cjT3D-000EZc-7G for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2017 15:54:02 +0000 Received: by mail-ua0-f179.google.com with SMTP id c11so31893982uaa.0 for ; Thu, 02 Mar 2017 07:53:54 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SLLF9sUq0EdWwHFTVxMGbEldU+pwA1g8aR09YqNbJ28=; b=Q4VRLf5WQQBV8svoE4+nUGg4S4G03GU8hWXcPaHb2QiKAkMiCgKCuAFlqzMsI3dNef 35J+fMKsAgW/4dh2bJyuerEZaAxTY08NQcvn1IlnTaFOsGXOPv4D7ifIxAyZ00LukRQ4 X5l0SNjpKKmyO21lbKqhUbv51X1F5brkT9xND8E/y6yMhuHz2wyqjEDO3vcGnlU5JrqX LeUEG9c4+wuQqQ89Vh6XGFc+K9Ffel925pMigr1Zep47cDFD5I3oOji6D7wB+7oIxWro a2EZ+WQBSTPCIDC3302dgYzX/dDOgNcnJgoTRQ55YpRfxzvqMOVsVCMUiiT3REAYiCAK 71OQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SLLF9sUq0EdWwHFTVxMGbEldU+pwA1g8aR09YqNbJ28=; b=DKZ/A1hkPJhcB1CZ8hqdPvWck29Eu5E/dSW5CfO8oqn+GYsYMYw98amRzjKgVJhuK3 ljuauBZOEv4T1fIoyq72EukI9LsBKWMFLrX4+0gOYXjHYEJts+I69/kF1vHAmpBXPlMw eS/QVYTkTD+o9QZhZbddfFL6FRnlYDKOfQhhJXbw5knYjPWGQObTHhCjH7pqQt1ot8rw kbWrazXlfrF576fSq6vFmN++7pVso4xciR9gf8ZIqRBt2GlJkDOB06O0pE6bwxDMKoQi UbuirMHywOChRtK2twkc7XrLsThccWc5ifRNKcMLZvRKbyfwNIQIdJ+22KeXDaRIjJfF 0laQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39na3j1bmqzH5D/R2Ab9L82shX+lh5CZ/rG7QeZ6cRo7mpCth6xF4qXXYSXP7x3eUv/f1HzHsqibnNLIoQ== X-Received: by 10.176.16.23 with SMTP id f23mr33431uab.99.1488470033626; Thu, 02 Mar 2017 07:53:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <58A6D0D9020000A100024B83@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <20170302100915.GA8946@thyrsus.com> In-Reply-To: <20170302100915.GA8946@thyrsus.com> From: Mark Atwood Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 15:53:41 +0000 Message-ID: To: esr@thyrsus.com, Ulrich Windl X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.217.179 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: fallenpegasus@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 03:14:24 +0000 Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Authentication issues for control messages X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3032152268299072113==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============3032152268299072113== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045e1d649cfb5e0549c16f6d --f403045e1d649cfb5e0549c16f6d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello Ulrich You can get those files from the the NTPsec repo via git clone git@gitlab.com:NTPsec/ntpsec.git Learn more about NTPsec at https://ntpsec.org/ and https://gitlab.com/NTPsec ..m On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:09 AM Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Ulrich Windl > > I had written a tool (in Perl) to query ntpd via mode 6 control requests > > (and mode 3 client requests) when I decided to implement authentication > > (MAC). > > The first issue is the lack of proper specification of the MAC. I wanted > to > > implement symmetric MD5 keys only, but even that showed to be poorly > > specified: > > You might find a look at pylib/packet.py in the NTPsec distribution > interesting; also, docs/mode6.txt. You are unfortunately correct that > this is not described at all clearly in the RFCS or the documentation > shipped with the NTF implementation; I had to reverse-engineer a more > exact description by looking at code. > -- > Eric S. Raymond > > Please consider contributing to my Patreon page at > https://www.patreon.com/esr > so I can keep the invisible wheels of the Internet turning. Give > generously - > the civilization you save might be your own. > > --f403045e1d649cfb5e0549c16f6d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Ulrich

You can get those files fr= om the the NTPsec repo via

Learn more about NTPsec at = https://ntpsec.org/=C2=A0and=C2=A0https://gitlab.com/NTPsec

..m

=
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:09 AM = Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com&= gt; wrote:
Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de>
> I had written a tool (in Perl) to query ntpd via mode 6 control reques= ts
> (and mode 3 client requests) when I decided to implement authenticatio= n
> (MAC).
> The first issue is the lack of proper specification of the MAC. I want= ed to
> implement symmetric MD5 keys only, but even that showed to be poorly > specified:

You might find a look at pylib/packet.py in the NTPsec distribution
interesting; also, docs/mode6.txt.=C2=A0 You are unfortunately correct that=
this is not described at all clearly in the RFCS or the documentation
shipped with the NTF implementation; I had to reverse-engineer a more
exact description by looking at code.
--
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 <a href=3D"= http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond&= lt;/a>

Please consider contributing to my Patreon page at ht= tps://www.patreon.com/esr
so I can keep the invisible wheels of the Internet turning. Give generously= -
the civilization you save might be your own.

--f403045e1d649cfb5e0549c16f6d-- --===============3032152268299072113== 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 --===============3032152268299072113==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Fri Mar 3 16:03:12 2017 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 C5912129665 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 16:03:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zFdeSnfSPJR4 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 16:03:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D6F6129670 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 16:01:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48F9986DB32 for ; Sat, 4 Mar 2017 00:01:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A94C86DAB2 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 23:55:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cjx2u-0009iz-0f for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 23:55:45 +0000 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5C8A129694; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 15:55:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.46.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <148858532293.15846.525138581491374341.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 15:55:22 -0800 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 4.31.198.44 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: agenda@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] ntp - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 98 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Dear Karen O'Donoghue, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. ntp Session 1 (2:00:00) Monday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500 Room Name: Montreux 3 size: 80 --------------------------------------------- Special Note: Joint session with TICTOC Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Network Time Protocol Area Name: Internet Area Session Requester: Karen O'Donoghue Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 2 Hours Number of Attendees: 30 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: oauth sacm saag cfrg tls trans ippm bmwg People who must be present: Karen O'Donoghue Suresh Krishnan Dieter Sibold Resources Requested: Experimental room setup (boardroom and classroom) subject to availability Special Requests: Please schedule jointly with the tictoc wg. --------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 8 05:50:02 2017 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 700AD12962A for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 05:50:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AIO2Ug3TzFNS for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 05:50:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7AEB12943C for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 05:50:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A85D86DB1B for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 13:50:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9028286DAED for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 13:48:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.bs.ptb.de ([192.53.103.120]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1clbxP-000FGp-Bl for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:48:57 +0000 Received: from smtp-hub.bs.ptb.de (smtpint01.bs.ptb.de [141.25.87.32]) by mx1.bs.ptb.de with ESMTP id v28Dmjp4009736-v28Dmjp6009736 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:48:45 +0100 Received: from lotus.bs.ptb.de (lotus.bs.ptb.de [141.25.85.200]) by smtp-hub.bs.ptb.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABE422FB1D0 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:48:45 +0100 (CET) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: From: kristof.teichel@ptb.de Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 14:48:30 +0100 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.53.103.120 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: kristof.teichel@ptb.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Unlinkability formulations in merged draft "NTS-4-NTP" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============8114995320448134141==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Dies ist eine mehrteilige Nachricht im MIME-Format. --===============8114995320448134141== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 004BEDC4C12580DD_=" Dies ist eine mehrteilige Nachricht im MIME-Format. --=_alternative 004BEDC4C12580DD_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hello all, we have made a few changes to the merged draft (have been pushed to the repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion with Aanchal. These changes are about the formulation of the text regarding unlikability. We would welcome any comments or suggestions. The relevant text in Section "Objectives": - Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkability, i. e. it does not leak data that would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy Considerations"]. The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations": Unlinkability shall prevent that a device can be tracked when it changes networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above. Note that the objective of NTS regarding unlinkability is merely to not leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify legacy linkability issues that are already present in NTP. To minimize the risk of being tracked by a passive adversary the NTP client has to minimize the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" Also, the objective only holds for actual time synchronization traffic, as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as time servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send authentication data). What do people here think? Best regards, Kristof --=_alternative 004BEDC4C12580DD_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Hello all,

we have made a few changes to the merged draft (have been pushed to the repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion with Aanchal.
These changes are about the formulation of the text regarding unlikability.
We would welcome any comments or suggestions.


The relevant text in Section "Objectives":

- Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkability, i. e. it does not leak data that would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy Considerations"].

The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations":

Unlinkability shall prevent that a device can be tracked when it changes networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above.

Note that the objective of NTS regarding unlinkability is merely to not leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify legacy linkability issues that are already present in NTP. To minimize the risk of being tracked by a passive adversary the NTP client has to minimize the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization"

Also, the objective only holds for actual time synchronization traffic, as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as time servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send authentication data).


What do people here think?

Best regards,
Kristof --=_alternative 004BEDC4C12580DD_=-- --===============8114995320448134141== 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 --===============8114995320448134141==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 8 07:14:26 2017 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 A05FC1296C3 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 07:14:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9-4qiVdDQPs1 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 07:14:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D7861296BC for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 07:14:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29C0B86DB28 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 15:14:23 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E661186DAED for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 15:13:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f42.google.com ([209.85.214.42]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cldHE-000FxR-W2 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 15:13:27 +0000 Received: by mail-it0-f42.google.com with SMTP id m27so37915057iti.1 for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 07:13:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=GZSG74oA4RjyFEDnP170GFOPpgQYlXx6KLi9fmC7Zh4=; b=kpwAaOZbt4hleZN8CafuLsnTRxLLkfqSlr1S0wJ+S63T5nOqeGRJJJ0DvCgU1ki9nS QO5pEmJrU4KsQN0LMZtO1FYyhn+ozeA/CUCCmotSIYgcLFRp8r37sp9i7gY9yTOMcKMu 8UHN94LlsFYexb2hLAqyFRUdNEbjDaqNTGXcwLJ5MXjpcP/BoY2OwpRxWByLN/vl386A ayFverrssBNqLCKONujva/3iqKl00XESIlodH5bzppeQwAB/wUS+hmLQk/JaWOY7fVSS C66f68IlCro5hzbhfyTLDTNn1PL++HRH339/IeIw70zVisPdzxGrQUWp9K2MhVtjhd7C iitg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GZSG74oA4RjyFEDnP170GFOPpgQYlXx6KLi9fmC7Zh4=; b=RaXtVKfAdRr7ceIOtlVJ2OZmHP296w65u0+XIxXTfhF4Ygl19pkkUslra09q4sBVPH ZrIvYfj/E44NKkxVxUkeLkrDczDUXznV56Vtc0EeSTuXFlY4RjiM5y7z/uNPsugzZY9R imQFmlZkqIxgpxnuLjaVuWnF1VUsvsA17cQBv4kiXbfo4oSKK2WB+wGoRI/fz/uYLAsH GvFHlXex7T7Pps5UStTRymsloqTCYdChsPxh7yPwXvB0ua4RORJImPkrj/V1u82v6q21 STFmn7S2tbK1b8Aek2unV/pLe6rmoN4gwHEjtxH++/esB2uYW8+RtUTXPSgQpm9QVjvZ T+GA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kaJm/8zvThLyw7Bk5SJzw3dsruhjmHiRt6tydr/CkzxXTiMdtcqaNPGCSbA+MOyHt0hLPBN4NctlWfzQ== X-Received: by 10.107.129.75 with SMTP id c72mr7576241iod.23.1488986000130; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 07:13:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.141.197 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 07:12:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Sharon Goldberg Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 10:12:39 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: EoDrbc_OdfIMT3fEqtV7bBPQonk Message-ID: To: kristof.teichel@ptb.de X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.214.42 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sharon.goldbe@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Unlinkability formulations in merged draft "NTS-4-NTP" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4771135632156065522==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============4771135632156065522== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f99b09d0afb054a39912c --001a113f99b09d0afb054a39912c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Kristof, thanks for this. There are 3 documents in there, I assume you are talking about https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts/blob/master/draft-ietf- ntp-using-nts-for-ntp.xml right? Also, there are some missing refs so the draft doesn't compile on xml2rfc ... On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:48 AM, wrote: > Hello all, > > we have made a few changes to the merged draft (have been pushed to the > repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion > with Aanchal. > These changes are about the formulation of the text regarding unlikability. > We would welcome any comments or suggestions. > > > The relevant text in Section "Objectives": > > - Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkability, i. e. it does not leak data that > would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between > networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that > function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy > Considerations"]. > > The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations": > > Unlinkability shall prevent that a device can be tracked when it changes > networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different > networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new > address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of > recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an > NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually > supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents > recognizable data in the sense outlined above. > > Note that the objective of NTS regarding unlinkability is merely to not > leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify > legacy linkability issues that are already present in NTP. To minimize the > risk of being tracked by a passive adversary the NTP client has to minimize > the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as > described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" > > Also, the objective only holds for actual time synchronization traffic, as > opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be guaranteed > for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as time > servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send > authentication data). > > > What do people here think? > > Best regards, > Kristof > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > -- Sharon Goldberg Computer Science, Boston University http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe --001a113f99b09d0afb054a39912c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Kristof, thanks for this.=C2=A0 There are 3 documents in t= here, I assume you are talking about=C2=A0


right? Also, there are some missing refs so the draft doesn't compile = on xml2rfc ...

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:48 AM, <kristof.teichel@ptb.de> wrote:
Hello all,

we have made a few changes to the = merged draft (have been pushed to the repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion with Aanchal.
These changes are about the formul= ation of the text regarding unlikability.
We would welcome any comments or s= uggestions.


The relevant text in Section "= ;Objectives":

- Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkabi= lity, i. e. it does not leak data that would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy Considerations"].

The relevant text in Section "= ;Privacy Considerations":

Unlinkability shall prevent that a= device can be tracked when it changes networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above.

Note that the objective of NTS reg= arding unlinkability is merely to not leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify legacy linkability issues that are alread= y present in NTP. To minimize the risk of being tracked by a passive adversar= y the NTP client has to minimize the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-d= ata-minimization"

Also, the objective only holds for= actual time synchronization traffic, as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as time servers (because the latter can be extern= ally triggered to send authentication data).


What do people here think?

Best regards,
Kristof
________________= _______________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.or= g
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg



--
Sharon Goldberg
Computer Science,= Boston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe
--001a113f99b09d0afb054a39912c-- --===============4771135632156065522== 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 --===============4771135632156065522==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 8 08:43:44 2017 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 03C8012963E for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:43:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lrnl0_wSm6PX for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:43:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E2A129621 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:43:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A54486DB58 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:43:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75E8686DAED for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:42:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1clefb-000Gch-Df for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 16:42:42 +0000 Received: by mail-it0-f54.google.com with SMTP id m27so41604986iti.1 for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 08:42:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=xLNHIOvVpI7IVgmqiP2G9x1baP925kHlJOwgcfP0XxY=; b=p4//Hx2er2eW/dqFrsZ48shT/GTBjFYS6Gnxl2QnNKK8d6Wq+4Z9o5WVPViNPe0sYy FAnO8KqtlzGfzdHjwn9BYmj3CZDFQuCjNTR5WZ/T1O0M8rhNRYgXyYVtU4+sFjcKq/+J GZAibedkKQBkBRzzLB+nNgW9cZZY3g8+SbYLzjuLcqYEg6xyQkNunCOBGgsBHiSmJYGN Qr6XP2YCKscWd3PqTXcgySY4M1U6XJR16wJK2wwXDU6oXYtarkfhCecZBXEnj6pQdicW P2MOayLK5KPSxcJwjvE/d72N9r408fWLMxDQibNks90p0bIesoXyXuf1K0Nq3E90LUUE i1Pg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xLNHIOvVpI7IVgmqiP2G9x1baP925kHlJOwgcfP0XxY=; b=onldglukXYKud0+sLB4HqZrYDAn0IX0YsS2U+aK5HebcJlTZWcco/HEro9ZcAMFuc6 /03UOTJacNp/NWifOIr/2Oj3ZswFrhdjZvTtvTJDgihTv3wje0FQJlr08iyyXic0cBS+ bXFLO6GfB181M439tCK7490yYazOwx+CfLOWp0QNjuvHnpU65oYXGUhjbcKihGdLIMAT 4VDsHciGrVEqpsf7Z3PQgRhvBDYJZxjHPGdB/rhz0uPlf8264i6VDJo7J4xNX4uuQGSA dp5av0VaBX4+stqDtpvVCZB+4wALKoERolbkk4okjNx/1zjoNS2lPmO56w2WVxoBtbQL fiRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nPdIX3RV++w2egkO5cOWHq/ILquhH2MQMYRwV64yTgLhOweEsLV8uypKXQ4KCR27T4KP1ITNuPs39jFQ== X-Received: by 10.36.209.198 with SMTP id w189mr27096138itg.83.1488991354548; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 08:42:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.141.197 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:41:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Sharon Goldberg Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:41:53 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: a6DpInv6ZOg3jDi5d_2x904J_1A Message-ID: To: kristof.teichel@ptb.de X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.214.54 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sharon.goldbe@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Unlinkability formulations in merged draft "NTS-4-NTP" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4393369776293734084==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============4393369776293734084== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0a7728c30160054a3ad097 --94eb2c0a7728c30160054a3ad097 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 This is looking good. I've taken a pass over what was sent and propose the below candidate text. Note my use of the IETF "MUST". The relevant text in Section "Objectives": - Privacy: Once an NTS session has been established, NTS supports unlinkability for devices that (1) use NTS as clients and (2) minimize the information they expose in client query (mode 3) packets per "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" . Unlinkability ensures that NTS does not leak data that allows an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between networks. See [link to Section "Privacy Considerations"] for details. The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations": Unlinkability prevents a device from being tracked when it changes network addresses (e.g. because said device moved between different networks). In other word, unlinkability thwarts an attacker that seeks to link a new network address used by a device with a network address that it was formerly using, because of recognizable data that device is persistently sent as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above. NTS's unlinkability object is merely to not leak any additional data that could be used to link a device's network address. NTS does not rectify legacy linkability issues that are already present in NTP. Thus, a client that requires unlinkability MUST also minimize information transmitted in a client query (mode 3) packet as described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" The unlinkability objective only holds for time synchronization traffic, as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as time servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send authentication data). It should also be noted that it could be possible to link devices that operate as time servers from their time synchronization traffic, using information exposed in (mode 4) server response packets (e.g. reference ID, reference time, stratum, poll). Also, devices that respond to NTP control queries could be linked using the information revealed by control queries. On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Sharon Goldberg wrote: > Kristof, thanks for this. There are 3 documents in there, I assume you > are talking about > > https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts/blob/master/draft-ietf-ntp > -using-nts-for-ntp.xml > > right? Also, there are some missing refs so the draft doesn't compile on > xml2rfc ... > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:48 AM, wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> we have made a few changes to the merged draft (have been pushed to the >> repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion >> with Aanchal. >> These changes are about the formulation of the text regarding >> unlikability. >> We would welcome any comments or suggestions. >> >> >> The relevant text in Section "Objectives": >> >> - Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkability, i. e. it does not leak data that >> would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between >> networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that >> function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy >> Considerations"]. >> >> The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations": >> >> Unlinkability shall prevent that a device can be tracked when it changes >> networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different >> networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new >> address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of >> recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an >> NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually >> supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents >> recognizable data in the sense outlined above. >> >> Note that the objective of NTS regarding unlinkability is merely to not >> leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify >> legacy linkability issues that are already present in NTP. To minimize the >> risk of being tracked by a passive adversary the NTP client has to minimize >> the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as >> described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" >> >> Also, the objective only holds for actual time synchronization traffic, >> as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be >> guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as >> time servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send >> authentication data). >> >> >> What do people here think? >> >> Best regards, >> Kristof >> _______________________________________________ >> ntpwg mailing list >> ntpwg@lists.ntp.org >> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg >> > > > > -- > Sharon Goldberg > Computer Science, Boston University > http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe > -- Sharon Goldberg Computer Science, Boston University http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe --94eb2c0a7728c30160054a3ad097 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This is looking good.=C2=A0 I've taken a pass ove= r what was sent and propose the below candidate text. =C2=A0

=
Note my use of the IETF "MUST".

The relevant text in Section "Objectives":

- Privacy: Once an NTS session has been established, NTS supports unl= inkability for devices that (1) use NTS as clients and (2) minimize the inf= ormation they expose in client query (mode 3) packets per "draft-dfran= ke-ntp-data-minimization" . Unlinkability ensures that NTS does n= ot leak data that allows an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they = move between networks. See [link to Section "Privacy Considerations&qu= ot;] for details.

The relevant text in Section &qu= ot;Privacy Considerations":

Unlinkability pre= vents a device from being tracked when it changes network addresses (e.g. b= ecause said device moved between different networks). In other word, unlink= ability thwarts an attacker that seeks to link a new network address used b= y a device with a network address that it was formerly using, because of re= cognizable data that device is persistently sent as part of an NTS-secured = NTP association. This is the justification for continually supplying the cl= ient with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents recognizable dat= a in the sense outlined above.

NTS's unlinkabi= lity object is merely to not leak any additional data that could be used to= link a device's network address. NTS does not rectify legacy linkabili= ty issues that are already present in NTP. Thus, a client that requires unl= inkability MUST also minimize information transmitted in a client query (mo= de 3) packet as described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-mi= nimization"

The unlinkability objective only = holds for time synchronization traffic, as opposed to key exchange traffic.= This implies that it cannot be guaranteed for devices that function not on= ly as time clients, but also as time servers (because the latter can be ext= ernally triggered to send authentication data). =C2=A0=C2=A0

=
It should also be noted that it could be possible to link device= s that operate as time servers from their time synchronization traffic, usi= ng information exposed in (mode 4) server response packets (e.g. reference = ID, reference time, stratum, poll).=C2=A0 Also, devices that respond to NTP= control queries could be linked using the information revealed by control = queries. =C2=A0

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Sharon Goldberg <= goldbe@cs.bu.edu&= gt; wrote:
Kristo= f, thanks for this.=C2=A0 There are 3 documents in there, I assume you are = talking about=C2=A0


right? Also, there are= some missing refs so the draft doesn't compile on xml2rfc ...

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:48 AM, = <kristof.tei= chel@ptb.de> wrote:
Hello all,

we have made a few changes to the = merged draft (have been pushed to the repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion with Aanchal.
These changes are about the formul= ation of the text regarding unlikability.
We would welcome any comments or s= uggestions.


The relevant text in Section "= ;Objectives":

- Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkabi= lity, i. e. it does not leak data that would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy Considerations"].

The relevant text in Section "= ;Privacy Considerations":

Unlinkability shall prevent that a= device can be tracked when it changes networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above.

Note that the objective of NTS reg= arding unlinkability is merely to not leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify legacy linkability issues that are alread= y present in NTP. To minimize the risk of being tracked by a passive adversar= y the NTP client has to minimize the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-d= ata-minimization"

Also, the objective only holds for= actual time synchronization traffic, as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as time servers (because the latter can be extern= ally triggered to send authentication data).


What do people here think?

Best regards,
Kristof
____= ___________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.or= g
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg



--
Sharon Goldberg
Computer Science, Boston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~gold= be



--
Sharon Goldberg
= Computer Science, Boston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe
--94eb2c0a7728c30160054a3ad097-- --===============4393369776293734084== 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 --===============4393369776293734084==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 8 08:44:42 2017 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 6D31D1293FB for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:44:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5axtTmiwjvch for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:44:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BCEA129621 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:44:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF0486DB1B for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:44:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E8B86DAED for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 16:43:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1clegi-000GeH-Jj for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 16:43:51 +0000 Received: by mail-it0-f46.google.com with SMTP id h10so105457427ith.1 for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 08:43:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=C6Xt+G8b62dmnmFfObRjwtbG5QfyRB/jdmWo0sShht0=; b=FbreFnhzWGhkZgnYiNA08S70QwARMr1vbMYWowGNJsOrHOvbYBbYKP/BESjZ4p0dLl PusXsEIZwHb2BLvfBtl7i1oRFJzih42e7b48tq/1+a6hy+lqBHfGgnVIo6HdQBLkRchf QfZEhna6Uy/6bflTjINRWRJsLtD/CifRUAWZe3MskSt12eyBKVOW77SqadlHjb2Uhg/6 Bpxq3H+6MtrAIWgindCXiBs2I9rTZCwhmXMmAIKyRZJ2VmWrIEOOeAPNfO3Vg/sX8F1p A8Pt8bb3L8vlq7LC5D/Gh1SD1KYafDHYgSv8ji25NtZN2pNtC+Is0wAT/6sDwtKGGMi5 tpmA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=C6Xt+G8b62dmnmFfObRjwtbG5QfyRB/jdmWo0sShht0=; b=Dcq8SOUgEPkauonuekS1sRAP5qqtnX65BEaq0yf75Igx7IXfz2u4PJpmI8kYJX3m3T +Wi5sgsVQPpEHUkOSHikoKOqPlkAGULtMdGESieHbSte+rmmp4OqaofKZv3iJacgNVU+ CjqagyfbjJqgZPAX4EaJvXI2wJS3/Pr6SZa9cAjSY18CEgmLbxrSDQUZHAdj0KAjNqXw nzJ7NGaTOeKkO/7d9RmaBcX4qr0d8mK6VF2VTDmQSQiQu7NkAm7G3RNTCBiqhgenG+pr Q9l9zAkcpU/5/2SitzglLanShp+G255DgWVY4IFiA+Y1/1PXoCvZsMX9tsOb2HfM7Xbw KH9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lPWtlmFETkaHzyxOjwCZpA2q8pSE8QRUUeFYlEvcrBjLnmFExonp8/SsTyRdfVuRpgaJAElhb/1IbAng== X-Received: by 10.36.153.197 with SMTP id a188mr27112614ite.5.1488991418449; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 08:43:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.141.197 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:42:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Sharon Goldberg Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:42:57 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4x0e3omZf9UFJbgGfG3b0LPJsMg Message-ID: To: kristof.teichel@ptb.de X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.214.46 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sharon.goldbe@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Unlinkability formulations in merged draft "NTS-4-NTP" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8361484668322600220==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============8361484668322600220== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0895b4921de9054a3ad418 --94eb2c0895b4921de9054a3ad418 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Btw, let us know when is a good time to review the whole draft. I'd like to take a look before IETF. On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Sharon Goldberg wrote: > This is looking good. I've taken a pass over what was sent and propose > the below candidate text. > > Note my use of the IETF "MUST". > > The relevant text in Section "Objectives": > > - Privacy: Once an NTS session has been established, NTS supports > unlinkability for devices that (1) use NTS as clients and (2) minimize the > information they expose in client query (mode 3) packets per > "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" . Unlinkability ensures that NTS > does not leak data that allows an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when > they move between networks. See [link to Section "Privacy Considerations"] > for details. > > The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations": > > Unlinkability prevents a device from being tracked when it changes network > addresses (e.g. because said device moved between different networks). In > other word, unlinkability thwarts an attacker that seeks to link a new > network address used by a device with a network address that it was > formerly using, because of recognizable data that device is persistently > sent as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification > for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie > never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above. > > NTS's unlinkability object is merely to not leak any additional data that > could be used to link a device's network address. NTS does not rectify > legacy linkability issues that are already present in NTP. Thus, a client > that requires unlinkability MUST also minimize information transmitted in a > client query (mode 3) packet as described in the draft > "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" > > The unlinkability objective only holds for time synchronization traffic, > as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be > guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as > time servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send > authentication data). > > It should also be noted that it could be possible to link devices that > operate as time servers from their time synchronization traffic, using > information exposed in (mode 4) server response packets (e.g. reference ID, > reference time, stratum, poll). Also, devices that respond to NTP control > queries could be linked using the information revealed by control queries. > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Sharon Goldberg wrote: > >> Kristof, thanks for this. There are 3 documents in there, I assume you >> are talking about >> >> https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts/blob/master/draft-ietf-ntp >> -using-nts-for-ntp.xml >> >> right? Also, there are some missing refs so the draft doesn't compile on >> xml2rfc ... >> >> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:48 AM, wrote: >> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> we have made a few changes to the merged draft (have been pushed to the >>> repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion >>> with Aanchal. >>> These changes are about the formulation of the text regarding >>> unlikability. >>> We would welcome any comments or suggestions. >>> >>> >>> The relevant text in Section "Objectives": >>> >>> - Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkability, i. e. it does not leak data that >>> would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between >>> networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that >>> function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy >>> Considerations"]. >>> >>> The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations": >>> >>> Unlinkability shall prevent that a device can be tracked when it changes >>> networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different >>> networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new >>> address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of >>> recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an >>> NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually >>> supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents >>> recognizable data in the sense outlined above. >>> >>> Note that the objective of NTS regarding unlinkability is merely to not >>> leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify >>> legacy linkability issues that are already present in NTP. To minimize the >>> risk of being tracked by a passive adversary the NTP client has to minimize >>> the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as >>> described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" >>> >>> Also, the objective only holds for actual time synchronization traffic, >>> as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be >>> guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as >>> time servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send >>> authentication data). >>> >>> >>> What do people here think? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Kristof >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ntpwg mailing list >>> ntpwg@lists.ntp.org >>> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sharon Goldberg >> Computer Science, Boston University >> http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe >> > > > > -- > Sharon Goldberg > Computer Science, Boston University > http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe > -- Sharon Goldberg Computer Science, Boston University http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe --94eb2c0895b4921de9054a3ad418 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Btw, let us know when is a good time to review the whole d= raft.
I'd like to take a look before IETF.

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 11:41 A= M, Sharon Goldberg <goldbe@cs.bu.edu> wrote:
This is looking good.=C2=A0 I'v= e taken a pass over what was sent and propose the below candidate text. =C2= =A0

Note my use of the IETF "MUST".

The relevant text in Section "Objectives":

- Privacy: Once an NTS session has been established= , NTS supports unlinkability for devices that (1) use NTS as clients and (2= ) minimize the information they expose in client query (mode 3) packets per= "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization" . Unlinkability ensur= es that NTS does not leak data that allows an attacker to track mobile NTP = clients when they move between networks. See [link to Section "Privacy= Considerations"] for details.

The relevant text in Section "Privacy Considerations":

Unlinkability prevents a device from being tracked= when it changes network addresses (e.g. because said device moved between = different networks). In other word, unlinkability thwarts an attacker that = seeks to link a new network address used by a device with a network address= that it was formerly using, because of recognizable data that device is pe= rsistently sent as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the just= ification for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that = a cookie never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above.

NTS's unlinkability object is merely to not leak= any additional data that could be used to link a device's network addr= ess. NTS does not rectify legacy linkability issues that are already presen= t in NTP. Thus, a client that requires unlinkability MUST also minimize inf= ormation transmitted in a client query (mode 3) packet as described in the = draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization"

The unlinkability objective only holds for time synchronization tr= affic, as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be g= uaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as t= ime servers (because the latter can be externally triggered to send authent= ication data). =C2=A0=C2=A0

It should also be note= d that it could be possible to link devices that operate as time servers fr= om their time synchronization traffic, using information exposed in (mode 4= ) server response packets (e.g. reference ID, reference time, stratum, poll= ).=C2=A0 Also, devices that respond to NTP control queries could be linked = using the information revealed by control queries. =C2=A0

On Wed= , Mar 8, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Sharon Goldberg <goldbe@cs.bu.edu>= wrote:
Kristof, thanks = for this.=C2=A0 There are 3 documents in there, I assume you are talking ab= out=C2=A0


right? Also, there are some miss= ing refs so the draft doesn't compile on xml2rfc ...

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:48 AM, <k= ristof.teichel@ptb.de> wrote:
Hello all,

we have made a few changes to the = merged draft (have been pushed to the repository at https://github.com/dfoxfranke/nts) after some discussion with Aanchal.
These changes are about the formul= ation of the text regarding unlikability.
We would welcome any comments or s= uggestions.


The relevant text in Section "= ;Objectives":

- Privacy: NTS preserves unlinkabi= lity, i. e. it does not leak data that would allow an attacker to track mobile NTP clients when they move between networks. Note that unlinkability is not guaranteed for devices that function as servers as well as clients, see [link to Section "Privacy Considerations"].

The relevant text in Section "= ;Privacy Considerations":

Unlinkability shall prevent that a= device can be tracked when it changes networ adresses (e.g. because said device moved between different networks). This is to say that an attacker shall be unable to link a new address with one that was formerly used by the device, because of recognizable data that the device persistently sends as part of an NTS-secured NTP association. This is the justification for continually supplying the client with fresh cookies, so that a cookie never represents recognizable data in the sense outlined above.

Note that the objective of NTS reg= arding unlinkability is merely to not leak any additional data that would cause linkability. NTS does not rectify legacy linkability issues that are alread= y present in NTP. To minimize the risk of being tracked by a passive adversar= y the NTP client has to minimize the information it transmits within a client request (mode 3 packet) as described in the draft "draft-dfranke-ntp-d= ata-minimization"

Also, the objective only holds for= actual time synchronization traffic, as opposed to key exchange traffic. This implies that it cannot be guaranteed for devices that function not only as time clients, but also as time servers (because the latter can be extern= ally triggered to send authentication data).


What do people here think?

Best regards,
Kristof
____= ___________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.or= g
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg



=
--
Sharon G= oldberg
Computer Science, Boston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe



--
Sharon Goldberg
Computer Science, Boston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe=



--
Sharon Goldberg
= Computer Science, Boston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe
--94eb2c0895b4921de9054a3ad418-- --===============8361484668322600220== 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 --===============8361484668322600220==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 13 12:51:05 2017 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 B34CE129AE9 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:51:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0nmbsxAjlTPk for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:51:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E194F129AEE for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:50:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (lists.ntp.org [10.224.90.243]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92C4C86DB03 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:50:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D024E86D77E for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:48:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cnVxY-0002nZ-04 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 19:48:55 +0000 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310A5129481; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:48:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.47.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <148943452716.20358.12108011219137868074@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:48:47 -0700 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 4.31.198.44 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: internet-drafts@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-08.txt X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Network Time Protocol of the IETF. Title : Network Time Security for the Network Time Protocol Authors : Daniel Fox Franke Dieter Sibold Kristof Teichel Filename : draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-08.txt Pages : 30 Date : 2017-03-13 Abstract: This memo specifies Network Time Security (NTS), a mechanism for using Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data (AEAD) to provide cryptographic security for the Network Time Protocol. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-08 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-08 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Mar 26 10:05:40 2017 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 BFEE212949F for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 10:05:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.791 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J2sbi1t7HT33 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 10:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 471FC129665 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 10:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6C5A86DBA0 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:05:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC56086D77E for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:05:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-cys01nam02on0049.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.37.49] helo=NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csBbb-000E5r-G9 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:05:34 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-isoc-org; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=nwfDeAaZ35wociWPgFbLygygG5MfkCuulcfvY5Cy8+s=; b=yyqUF/crzXYVRHwcHuYqhuJ/+qMyWMs+pyTtVrO8NJjOFYFgLKsMY0Ja96WT1Wj5Qzgfn3mN1BE5Vhy+Sd/BkJq8vOKaQmVX/jYvwyFdiVmI45AXCXcy0e7PzA8GLRzPBQFxYbtiYr9Ew7iVLWyjsMx5VBdJuSZLb96v+EFlZgw= Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) by CY4PR06MB2454.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.185.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.977.11; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:05:25 +0000 Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) with mapi id 15.01.0947.018; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:05:25 +0000 From: Karen O'Donoghue To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 Thread-Index: AQHSplMpjzK+r/tbd0uw+/kdkWyJ7w== Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:05:25 +0000 Message-ID: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: lists.ntp.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; lists.ntp.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=isoc.org; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [2001:67c:370:128:9c0:e822:5274:843f] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8ec01cc5-9dc1-44af-5c23-08d4746a4bdc x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY4PR06MB2454; 7:cNw92sgTwbMJDYgrIGmfdL1E4pqbFmU2lRtjRe+hsF3B2O48CVS81YM601+zDjROHTzD0+b7yFkBpOxmPcnCgLNK5Mlw8DqQEw2RXYvg/P6p6cB4vHuXGuqpIZgjbO0vz7sSAzGo1Fe4u8JZYpetm8LCwkbQU8DJlpb3UCxH8mJY8MZOafq811JcXdK6q0J4I08/2zEdR7qnAD1MNFkQT3918epSaJI4cQ4kMFYqZ2f3Bi1GOPlg1Lra7guqXIphEkFR4E/mZ9TTogRZpo2GbIQfB/Rr2TY4JIRJkCH4DzKAb9a7cQYnwLs1DFTxFdyazFv4MZcSdWqV6Ry4TlllRg== x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(6041248)(20161123564025)(20161123555025)(20161123558025)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(6072148); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; x-forefront-prvs: 0258E7CCD4 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39830400002)(39450400003)(54356999)(86362001)(7906003)(8676002)(7736002)(122556002)(2351001)(6486002)(25786009)(81166006)(50986999)(2900100001)(3660700001)(38730400002)(3280700002)(5660300001)(230783001)(99286003)(189998001)(2906002)(102836003)(6436002)(110136004)(1730700003)(33656002)(5640700003)(53936002)(606005)(82746002)(8936002)(36756003)(77096006)(6306002)(6512007)(2501003)(6116002)(54896002)(6916009)(83716003)(236005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; H:CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Mar 2017 17:05:25.1938 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR06MB2454 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.37.49 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) Subject: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============7713970871300174479==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============7713970871300174479== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_43A1BBF99EF54117ACE4989A23E34452isocorg_" --_000_43A1BBF99EF54117ACE4989A23E34452isocorg_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Folks, This message begins an NTP WGLC on the following draft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ntp-bcp Please review and comment as soon as possible. This document has been aroun= d for a long time, and we need to get it published. There have been suggest= ions of additional text, but this text has not been forthcoming. If there i= s some material you feel is important for this first version, please contri= bute it with your comments. This is a three week working group last call. Please submit comments to the= mailing list by 17 April. Thank you! Karen and Dieter --_000_43A1BBF99EF54117ACE4989A23E34452isocorg_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Folks,

This message begins an NTP WGLC on the following draft:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ntp-b= cp

Please review and comment as soon as possible. This documen= t has been around for a long time, and we need to get it published. There h= ave been suggestions of additional text, but this text has not been forthco= ming. If there is some material you feel is important for this first version, please contribute it with your c= omments. 

This is a three week working group last call. Please submit= comments to the mailing list by 17 April. 

Thank you!
Karen and Dieter

--_000_43A1BBF99EF54117ACE4989A23E34452isocorg_-- --===============7713970871300174479== 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 --===============7713970871300174479==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sun Mar 26 14:06:57 2017 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 86DCD1296CF for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:06:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yfM9F9IMrr7N for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:06:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AF971296CB for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:06:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5695986DB9F for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:06:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6ED86DAB8 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:06:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f175.google.com ([209.85.220.175]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csFN4-000Jys-Qn for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:06:50 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f175.google.com with SMTP id v127so24779437qkb.2 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:06:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=cgiFopVRGdSK5s1M7Xwv1Qp3t/23SnklQL6a150LKt4=; b=sGI20y5CtwyD/4kSQXhrvoOSO1XQZkpY4IaS8oAkWE9IvZJyPTKwOFoBw8F+yMcW4o TOLq4EGlRRrRWi+62kwgXu031Hww3PpMcHl5lnofFd0cq41DOCp6V+6QjmyPBGxXRXXp NhuEh+5vfy37ClZd/jkClsAGR/MBeG4S6CQBDfCiONuqn6SiTv+SKZrHf56r5zX2mJ2t QUvZz3BFvtXtQ2v+y8SM+mEN/JdpFayWEZOL53TXrmAI7MkYom+pKFgpu52hLFZo8n7d Vy2TxCgyKHnNfWyUohbl+7Bd9c39E4VeZqx+0Nsohm5LvwBF82skrx2Ag/o/3VjsXT/e eIAA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=cgiFopVRGdSK5s1M7Xwv1Qp3t/23SnklQL6a150LKt4=; b=fmSHGa5K3Ti15SWxH90j5sXK0MDLHC36co464j1PYrWwXwTnPx6CwfQCv3CM/GqWA6 7HQMr0HPHrBSCPJKwdVKBdq9X7t1JiMth1lhur9KJC6dHCnxPN2btuRgAJgUuFscRfKI lTxLdXFXk5qGuMy7r/25uOADzafSZ6ynkQZDsV6Jdc7SsFphJM4N3y2L43Zdvkvqezp2 Yg+/NrGPVDQKi2yo1D0SOCvM8jW2v5bf9Z4yOPE3V8aHW54wDdKZabiShsbmmWRBdIDN rj6tL2YJO0y/gIkWj/SRgcAv5ou8piNQ2zKWLd7nYCu/czWje0PLCedZEB5PcHkRMJJo 5BLg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1mUHaIXv4XHQ/3gKcbH3ZyZw/jdqep5O1PBijWSj1HKz3wBPDF6EZlT5Tis45z2cNzJEK4w2hgEJm9gg== X-Received: by 10.55.161.200 with SMTP id k191mr19171792qke.265.1490562401882; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:06:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:06:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:06:41 -0400 Message-ID: To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.175 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Section 5.2 Autokey contains several false or at least gravely misleading statements. > Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to > authenticate servers. By 2011, security researchers had identified > computational areas in the Autokey protocol that, while secure at the > time of its original design, were no longer secure. Autokey was never secure. The attacks discovered in 2011 were already readily tractable on 2003-era hardware, and do not depend on any sort of theoretical advances which occured in the interim. I.e., if Roettger were eight years older and had gone to grad school in 2003, I think he could have come up with this attack just as easily. > It is recommended that Autokey not be used. Know that as of the fall > of 2011, a common(?) laptop computer could crack the security cookie > used in the Autokey protocol in 30 minutes' time. If you want to use > Autokey, know that your session keys should be set to expire in under > 30 minutes' time. Where does this 30 minute estimate come from? The computational cost of attacking an autokey association is that of 2**32 short-message MD5 computations. Going by https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b4737e99bbef804a270c40, one Nvidia GTX 1080 GPU can perform about 25 billion MD5 computations per second, leading to a break in maximum of 172ms; the average time would be half this (86ms). In other words, an adversary with $500 in hardware resources can break your association before you've even finished the handshake. Even if the 30 minute estimate were accurate, the advice to expire session keys after 30 minutes would still be nonsensical because the attack is trivially parallelizable. If one 2011 laptop can break an association in 30 minutes, then 30 of them can break it in one minute. > If you have reason to believe your autokey-protected associations > will be attacked, you should read https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/ > ntpwg/2011-August/001714.html and decide what resources your > attackers might be using, and adjust the session key expiration time > accordingly. What is the relevance of the clause "If you have reason to believe your autokey-protected associations will be attacked"? If you're somehow certain that it *won't* be attacked (you're running NTP over a LAN located in a remote wilderness cabin with no outside connectivity) then there is no reason to use Autokey at all. In all other situations, there is *also* no reason to use Autokey, because it won't protect you. I propose that this section be replaced with the following language: Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to authenticate servers. However, by 2011, security researchers had identified grave vulnerabilities leading to a complete break of the protocol in real time on commodity hardware [add appropriate citation]. It is recommended that Autokey not be used. Other issues: several sections of this document reference ntp.conf configuration directive, which are implementation-specific and not described by any standard. I question the appropriateness of this; such advice seems better placed in ntpd documentation than in an IETF document. The document also contains numerous references to Wikipedia and other volatile URLs, which I'm pretty sure is contrary to IETF policy. Can these be replaced with more durable citations? The issues with the Autokey section are sufficiently severe that I cannot support advancing this draft to the IESG in its current form. If my recommended language is substituted then I will have no objection to advancement, notwithstanding the other issues I've raised. _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Mar 26 14:19:24 2017 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 0E590126BF0 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:19:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.291 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.291 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OnnfXLpomBO2 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 797F3127871 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36ED986DB4D for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:19:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D352886D77E for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:19:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f41.google.com ([209.85.214.41]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csFZ8-000KGc-CT for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:19:17 +0000 Received: by mail-it0-f41.google.com with SMTP id y18so54394047itc.0 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:19:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=SdSsPHlqKIQ0oV3iOuFEtDDEy3lkXocVHT+iamvpG/U=; b=CQ/QMVu4EUC38OhPptMuWHBaFUb4VT3YWBT73TyVJ8qSVbYiih0Xa+Hp647+rmP7c7 7uNed3JThzc0de3YU+PHZGCXxnfquWpoT8fp17rM6V3tyDi7FCgm4Yp0Bih4xfDsQNBp nkxLxKmPV20Gm1m04/cd9CwZz1eCjr7WTQdSD29fiumdZsc8rWUd9kiQmnJLI0k9G9lW 3B285BjG1LN5jruiWqNx+Oo4U1+JLuJroSsKU3AY1cT4U58eCDV6bJ4O9yUPxfyA5kzj CQUikdcOSxpiHkdzDE+kJbBVjkL0nD0WBcdCsivlCudzC/IagUHOb+G9QWf8RnOHPtl6 nRGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SdSsPHlqKIQ0oV3iOuFEtDDEy3lkXocVHT+iamvpG/U=; b=OsC5BDyiwVQvUbjBMuQSrGw8XOxfEiWpaKq/YpjfrH+rzCHNg8Wh3BpyMX0pxkkF70 2VNhxDOI0hcf1Nry2rk1VKqoW7obv+U+m82PSq1Hp/HlWXFi+7GP5R51vSUob7TReqbt sdHwHzGMuWMwZeE9IfJ3PPJp4Iyaw0F5osjHQ0rbADd4KVB888jwsfTjJGGcXO6+DKmJ 0xtbsXtKdWQWsYHbUEKFezpVxHz36Delamp7y3ke9pH4Xhxwa9OkvqbMPJ8ukUomCIx/ 8iX5KUtJLJ7MkzkYlPNHHJh2dKNxPbrf7s9LVAsnR7PS4UrblsA2npySEjSxncDuklfn 55HQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3o24Jz6wRBjRoU/ZmziY+6WfsMj/UL1Y6LTlOmjt2bgbTMRPL8O4fMruOFnk/foFMNGNgyAJ5ChqsPQg== X-Received: by 10.36.84.211 with SMTP id t202mr6721845ita.96.1490563149633; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:19:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.141.197 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:19:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> From: Sharon Goldberg Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 17:19:09 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: JOlIrKeL8E3Qr8ktqZmmK3OjmP0 Message-ID: To: Daniel Franke X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.214.41 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sharon.goldbe@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1857725766067650042==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============1857725766067650042== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1139ad8e0ca313054ba8c76a --001a1139ad8e0ca313054ba8c76a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I agree with Daniel regarding the autokey language. Sharon On Sunday, March 26, 2017, Daniel Franke wrote: > Section 5.2 Autokey contains several false or at least gravely > misleading statements. > > > Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to > > authenticate servers. By 2011, security researchers had identified > > computational areas in the Autokey protocol that, while secure at the > > time of its original design, were no longer secure. > > Autokey was never secure. The attacks discovered in 2011 were already > readily tractable on 2003-era hardware, and do not depend on any sort > of theoretical advances which occured in the interim. I.e., if > Roettger were eight years older and had gone to grad school in 2003, I > think he could have come up with this attack just as easily. > > > It is recommended that Autokey not be used. Know that as of the fall > > of 2011, a common(?) laptop computer could crack the security cookie > > used in the Autokey protocol in 30 minutes' time. If you want to use > > Autokey, know that your session keys should be set to expire in under > > 30 minutes' time. > > Where does this 30 minute estimate come from? The computational cost > of attacking an autokey association is that of 2**32 short-message MD5 > computations. Going by > https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b4737e99bbef804a270c40, one > Nvidia GTX 1080 GPU can perform about 25 billion MD5 computations per > second, leading to a break in maximum of 172ms; the average time would > be half this (86ms). In other words, an adversary with $500 in > hardware resources can break your association before you've even > finished the handshake. > > Even if the 30 minute estimate were accurate, the advice to expire > session keys after 30 minutes would still be nonsensical because the > attack is trivially parallelizable. If one 2011 laptop can break an > association in 30 minutes, then 30 of them can break it in one minute. > > > If you have reason to believe your autokey-protected associations > > will be attacked, you should read https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/ > > ntpwg/2011-August/001714.html and decide what resources your > > attackers might be using, and adjust the session key expiration time > > accordingly. > > What is the relevance of the clause "If you have reason to believe > your autokey-protected associations will be attacked"? If you're > somehow certain that it *won't* be attacked (you're running NTP over a > LAN located in a remote wilderness cabin with no outside connectivity) > then there is no reason to use Autokey at all. In all other > situations, there is *also* no reason to use Autokey, because it won't > protect you. > > I propose that this section be replaced with the following language: > > Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to > authenticate servers. However, by 2011, security researchers had > identified grave vulnerabilities leading to a complete break of the > protocol in real time on commodity hardware [add appropriate > citation]. It is recommended that Autokey not be used. > > Other issues: several sections of this document reference ntp.conf > configuration directive, which are implementation-specific and not > described by any standard. I question the appropriateness of this; > such advice seems better placed in ntpd documentation than in an IETF > document. > > The document also contains numerous references to Wikipedia and other > volatile URLs, which I'm pretty sure is contrary to IETF policy. Can > these be replaced with more durable citations? > > The issues with the Autokey section are sufficiently severe that I > cannot support advancing this draft to the IESG in its current form. > If my recommended language is substituted then I will have no > objection to advancement, notwithstanding the other issues I've > raised. > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > > -- Sharon Goldberg Computer Science, Boston University http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe --001a1139ad8e0ca313054ba8c76a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I agree with Daniel regarding the autokey language.=C2=A0

Sharon

On Sunday, March 26, 2017, Daniel Franke <dfoxfranke@gmail.com> wrote:
Section 5.2 Autokey contains several false or at least= gravely
misleading statements.

> Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to
> authenticate servers.=C2=A0 By 2011, security researchers had identifi= ed
> computational areas in the Autokey protocol that, while secure at the<= br> > time of its original design, were no longer secure.

Autokey was never secure. The attacks discovered in 2011 were already
readily tractable on 2003-era hardware, and do not depend on any sort
of theoretical advances which occured in the interim. I.e., if
Roettger were eight years older and had gone to grad school in 2003, I
think he could have come up with this attack just as easily.

> It is recommended that Autokey not be used.=C2=A0 Know that as of the = fall
> of 2011, a common(?) laptop computer could crack the security cookie > used in the Autokey protocol in 30 minutes' time.=C2=A0 If you wan= t to use
> Autokey, know that your session keys should be set to expire in under<= br> > 30 minutes' time.

Where does this 30 minute estimate come from? The computational cost
of attacking an autokey association is that of 2**32 short-message MD5
computations. Going by
https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b47= 37e99bbef804a270c40, one
Nvidia GTX 1080 GPU can perform about 25 billion MD5 computations per
second, leading to a break in maximum of 172ms; the average time would
be half this (86ms). In other words, an adversary with $500 in
hardware resources can break your association before you've even
finished the handshake.

Even if the 30 minute estimate were accurate, the advice to expire
session keys after 30 minutes would still be nonsensical because the
attack is trivially parallelizable. If one 2011 laptop can break an
association in 30 minutes, then 30 of them can break it in one minute.

> If you have reason to believe your autokey-protected associations
> will be attacked, you should read https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/
> ntpwg/2011-August/001714.html and decide what resources your
> attackers might be using, and adjust the session key expiration time > accordingly.

What is the relevance of the clause "If you have reason to believe
your autokey-protected associations will be attacked"? If you're somehow certain that it *won't* be attacked (you're running NTP ove= r a
LAN located in a remote wilderness cabin with no outside connectivity)
then there is no reason to use Autokey at all. In all other
situations, there is *also* no reason to use Autokey, because it won't<= br> protect you.

I propose that this section be replaced with the following language:

Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to
authenticate servers.=C2=A0 However, by 2011, security researchers had
identified grave vulnerabilities leading to a complete break of the
protocol in real time on commodity hardware [add appropriate
citation]. It is recommended that Autokey not be used.

Other issues: several sections of this document reference ntp.conf
configuration directive, which are implementation-specific and not
described by any standard. I question the appropriateness of this;
such advice seems better placed in ntpd documentation than in an IETF
document.

The document also contains numerous references to Wikipedia and other
volatile URLs, which I'm pretty sure is contrary to IETF policy. Can these be replaced with more durable citations?

The issues with the Autokey section are sufficiently severe that I
cannot support advancing this draft to the IESG in its current form.
If my recommended language is substituted then I will have no
objection to advancement, notwithstanding the other issues I've
raised.
_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
http://li= sts.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg



--
Sharon Goldberg
Computer Science, Bost= on University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe
--001a1139ad8e0ca313054ba8c76a-- --===============1857725766067650042== 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 --===============1857725766067650042==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sun Mar 26 14:52:27 2017 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 234C91287A7 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:52:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.791 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VVixVAPn-A3A for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D0FC1296D1 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:52:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FEC86DBAC for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:52:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8399086D77E for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:52:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bn3nam01on0068.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.33.68] helo=NAM01-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csG57-000L9t-8z for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:52:21 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-isoc-org; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=lr2LgIMI8bBogu0GupUXR6FrDK7XXnE3dXkDlfRu05Y=; b=vAO/2uQRQGvI67/i1iXxvAsc1UQsD3fszwB9dOhglS0nVIxbcdUlsJZwOtrOgQOoy0Tdz8cZ48juvJTPj6ML8KJmUPEjdiSvWMp0nv8UD2SQlFsnZ421C7D7DCNnu6SidhuKupqaUildFD2ldmJ51GdJfyal9tm320+ESjaqsIg= Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) by CY4PR06MB2454.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.185.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.977.11; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:52:11 +0000 Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) with mapi id 15.01.0947.018; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:52:11 +0000 From: Karen O'Donoghue To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) Thread-Index: AQHSpns4+7sbKLi2SUq/3VU0hMMlkw== Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:52:11 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: lists.ntp.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; lists.ntp.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=isoc.org; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [31.133.144.164] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 69f59efc-40e3-4ab2-34a5-08d474925b6e x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY4PR06MB2454; 7:GwTND+jw6up3DovRkXlv5rmGTWLXJeKb6N+riwYFGBFrZ8HXJxSuMoIWso690cyfFh6Xyc/rVIK/+LiTTrEkMJZAmDWSR7aOx3pJAdl0v1D5I+8Nf0C2GIwBZwuzdpTnvK1eFALtKqpBbSH/vsiFvD7RbLRqGgfZisCOsKf1OXWxb1IsEsC1UNOGJ+XewxmVpRMpiz/VuCZit91xfxGCiD1bQxbYC2zgxVs1IEAf+sa159Aq2lyUAVww72H4C3QoKWSqHKa1tKCtSUcB+2+QNj2qqvJF8A0jms5In8yKqvHnOrRxaR5w/jND98Q464Te7xJjFP/DX1pG4rixzJ4iHQ== x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(6041248)(20161123555025)(20161123564025)(20161123558025)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(6072148); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; x-forefront-prvs: 0258E7CCD4 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39830400002)(39450400003)(39410400002)(53936002)(606005)(33656002)(5640700003)(6506006)(102836003)(6436002)(2906002)(110136004)(1730700003)(3846002)(2501003)(6116002)(236005)(54896002)(6916009)(8936002)(6306002)(6512007)(36756003)(77096006)(25786009)(66066001)(6486002)(81166006)(50986999)(7906003)(86362001)(54356999)(122556002)(8676002)(7736002)(230783001)(2900100001)(99286003)(189998001)(3660700001)(38730400002)(5660300001)(3280700002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2454; H:CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Mar 2017 21:52:11.0185 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR06MB2454 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.33.68 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) Subject: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============1941959981905532624==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============1941959981905532624== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CA564C5C6CED4810BA2F5433F2525249isocorg_" --_000_CA564C5C6CED4810BA2F5433F2525249isocorg_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Rm9sa3MsDQoNCldlIGFncmVlZCB0byBhZG9wdCB0aGlzIGF0IHRoZSBsYXN0IElFVEYgbWVldGlu ZywgYnV0IHdlIGRpZG7igJl0IGFjdHVhbGx5IGlzc3VlIGEgY2FsbCBmb3IgYWRvcHRpb24uDQoN Cmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtZGZyYW5rZS1udHAt ZGF0YS1taW5pbWl6YXRpb24NCg0KSWYgeW91IGFyZSBpbiBhbnkgd2F5IG9wcG9zZWQgdG8gdGhl IGFkb3B0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgYXMgYSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGRvY3VtZW50LCBwbGVh c2UgcmVwbHkgdG8gdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdC4gV2Ugd2lsbCBiZSB0YWtpbmcgc2lsZW5jZSBh cyBjb25zZW50IGJlY2F1c2Ugd2UgZGlkIGRpc2N1c3MgdGhpcyBpbiBTZW91bC4NCg0KUmVnYXJk cywNCkthcmVuIGFuZCBEaWV0ZXINCg0K --_000_CA564C5C6CED4810BA2F5433F2525249isocorg_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KRm9sa3MsDQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIi PjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5XZSBhZ3JlZWQgdG8gYWRvcHQg dGhpcyBhdCB0aGUgbGFzdCBJRVRGIG1lZXRpbmcsIGJ1dCB3ZSBkaWRu4oCZdCBhY3R1YWxseSBp c3N1ZSBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uLiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48YnIg Y2xhc3M9IiI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJh Y2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1kZnJhbmtlLW50cC1kYXRhLW1pbmltaXphdGlv biIgY2xhc3M9IiI+aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1k ZnJhbmtlLW50cC1kYXRhLW1pbmltaXphdGlvbjwvYT48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJy IGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPklmIHlvdSBhcmUgaW4gYW55IHdheSBv cHBvc2VkIHRvIHRoZSBhZG9wdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IGFzIGEgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBk b2N1bWVudCwgcGxlYXNlIHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QuIFdlIHdpbGwgYmUgdGFr aW5nIHNpbGVuY2UgYXMgY29uc2VudCBiZWNhdXNlIHdlIGRpZCBkaXNjdXNzIHRoaXMgaW4gU2Vv dWwuJm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp diBjbGFzcz0iIj5SZWdhcmRzLDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5LYXJlbiBhbmQgRGlldGVy PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ib2R5Pg0KPC9o dG1sPg0K --_000_CA564C5C6CED4810BA2F5433F2525249isocorg_-- --===============1941959981905532624== 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 --===============1941959981905532624==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sun Mar 26 18:09:47 2017 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 995BD12922E for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:09:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AAZMEkyuQvSf for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:09:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F28391289B5 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:09:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC36286DBAB for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:09:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B604586D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:09:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csJ9W-0000aV-JZ for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:09:06 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9A3B0B826 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:08:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29C4EB825; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:08:57 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:08:56 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 01:08:57 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d86629107501516518800 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:09:41 +0000 Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/26/17 2:52 PM, Karen O'Donoghue wrote: > Folks, > = > We agreed to adopt this at the last IETF meeting, but we didn=92t actuall= y issue a call for adoption. > = > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization > = > If you are in any way opposed to the adoption of this draft as a working = group document, please reply to the mailing list. We will be taking silence= as consent because we did discuss this in Seoul. Section 3: - Change the recommendation for the LI, version number and mode fields from SHALL to MAY. - Change the recommendation for the Transmit Timestamp from SHALL to MAY. - Change the recommendation for "All the other header fields ..." from SHALL to MAY. These changes have benefit for protecting packets sent over the Big Bad Internet in cases where traffic can be watched, but *requiring* this change in more trusted environments is of questionable and/or minimal security benefit, and it does make debugging and some monitoring on the LAN more difficult. Section 4.2: Delete the last paragraph: The traditional behavior of the NTP reference implementation is to randomize only a few (typically 10-15 depending on the precision of the system clock) low-order bits of transmit timestamp, with all higher bits representing the system time, as measured just before the packet was sent. This is suboptimal, because with so few random bits, an adversary sending spoofed packets at high volume will have a good chance of correctly guessing a valid origin timestamp. It is incomplete and contains inaccuracies, aside from its inflammatory characteristics. -- = Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Mar 26 18:10:20 2017 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 07FF912878D for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:10:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.791 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=libertysys.com.au Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cri-qEWZ_bU4 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D63DB128DE5 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:10:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9321386DAF1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:10:17 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AFB386D77E for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 23:17:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ppp178-79.static.internode.on.net ([150.101.178.79] helo=mail.libertysys.com.au) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csHPm-000NKR-Dm for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 23:17:46 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.libertysys.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A9049222C for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:17:29 +1000 (AEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail2.gear.dyndns.org Received: from mail.libertysys.com.au ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.gear.dyndns.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V2fUWtnnXrNJ for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:17:18 +1000 (AEST) Received: from [172.22.64.102] (eber-home.gear.dyndns.org [172.22.64.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.libertysys.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CB29920FD for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:17:15 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=libertysys.com.au; s=2016; t=1490570236; bh=N/nAMQzuHv4jDjvWp6pCf+dU0ZNJMguaIVrnAaKv/zA=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=EiUq5dRjsqoSxpdEVww4skFAmeSElpVw1wJzZNuQoM/eNv8V1pZ9VKYYMsiDrvAMP v5NUDkI86LNc8qpHQxz1b5WETabPHhiThw8wm+AKtMx+FZShzpDoUDTgbkG5Nc8DPN LKyjSvFVE1IfNVd4Sw+gAtbw+BXkYE08xmlrjwVQ= To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: From: Paul Gear Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:17:12 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 150.101.178.79 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ntp@libertysys.com.au X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:10:13 +0000 Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 27/03/17 07:52, Karen O'Donoghue wrote: > Folks, > > We agreed to adopt this at the last IETF meeting, but we didn=92t > actually issue a call for adoption. = > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization > > If you are in any way opposed to the adoption of this draft as a > working group document, please reply to the mailing list. We will be > taking silence as consent because we did discuss this in Seoul. = > > Regards, > Karen and Dieter Just a quick question: Were costs/downsides of data minimization discussed at the meeting? In the light of the Snapchat NTP surge last December, there is an argument to be made that identifying and tracking classes of clients (in this case, users of a badly-behaved NTP client library) is necessary to ensure ongoing reliability of public NTP service. Thanks in advance, Paul _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Mar 26 18:22:03 2017 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 9328912894E for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:22:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4ZXGJqtnQK4J for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B43DB127097 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF4C86DBB0 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:22:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4803E86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:21:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csJLP-0000xV-2z for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:21:57 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 49F7EB833 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:21:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D05E1B825; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 01:21:13 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <2e09a06f-cf46-33fa-e024-dfd87281b56c@nwtime.org> Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:21:13 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 01:21:14 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d8690a107507633489815 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Paul illuminated a case I had forgotten. +1. On 3/26/17 4:17 PM, Paul Gear wrote: > On 27/03/17 07:52, Karen O'Donoghue wrote: >> Folks, >> >> We agreed to adopt this at the last IETF meeting, but we didn=92t >> actually issue a call for adoption. = >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization >> >> If you are in any way opposed to the adoption of this draft as a >> working group document, please reply to the mailing list. We will be >> taking silence as consent because we did discuss this in Seoul. = >> >> Regards, >> Karen and Dieter > = > Just a quick question: Were costs/downsides of data minimization > discussed at the meeting? In the light of the Snapchat NTP surge last > December, there is an argument to be made that identifying and tracking > classes of clients (in this case, users of a badly-behaved NTP client > library) is necessary to ensure ongoing reliability of public NTP service. > = > Thanks in advance, > Paul > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > = -- = Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 06:22:49 2017 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 C06A7127333 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 06:22:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7KczTDyUQhct for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 06:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6D8C129543 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 06:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB0CF86DBBB for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:22:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3951A86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:22:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csUbR-000Otn-00 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:22:43 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5BFDD215C for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:22:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com C5BFDD215C Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com C5BFDD215C Received: from localhost (holly.brq.redhat.com [10.34.24.121]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700BA18BBC for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:22:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:22:30 +0200 From: Miroslav Lichvar To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Message-ID: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:22:31 +0000 (UTC) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.132.183.28 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mlichvar@redhat.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:17:12AM +1000, Paul Gear wrote: > Just a quick question: Were costs/downsides of data minimization > discussed at the meeting? In the light of the Snapchat NTP surge last > December, there is an argument to be made that identifying and tracking > classes of clients (in this case, users of a badly-behaved NTP client > library) is necessary to ensure ongoing reliability of public NTP service. Maybe the reference ID and/or reference timestamp in client mode packets could be used as a User-Agent field? Some NTP implementations can be identified quite reliably by looking at the distribution of their polling interval and setting all fields to zero would not prevent that, but with these libraries and applications where NTP requests are triggered randomly by some user action, a User-Agent string would help a lot. The question is they would actually set that field. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 06:38:58 2017 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 8C77B128C83 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 06:38:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2gp0ETD4ByGl for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 06:38:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AE112783A for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 06:38:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7004386DB40 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:38:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 894AF86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:38:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csUr6-000PLP-NI for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:38:52 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0526C20807B for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:38:43 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com F0526C20807B Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx08.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com F0526C20807B Received: from localhost (holly.brq.redhat.com [10.34.24.121]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99793187BB for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:38:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:38:42 +0200 From: Miroslav Lichvar To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Message-ID: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.32]); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:38:44 +0000 (UTC) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.132.183.28 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mlichvar@redhat.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" T24gU3VuLCBNYXIgMjYsIDIwMTcgYXQgMDk6NTI6MTFQTSArMDAwMCwgS2FyZW4gTydEb25vZ2h1 ZSB3cm90ZToKPiBXZSBhZ3JlZWQgdG8gYWRvcHQgdGhpcyBhdCB0aGUgbGFzdCBJRVRGIG1lZXRp bmcsIGJ1dCB3ZSBkaWRu4oCZdCBhY3R1YWxseSBpc3N1ZSBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uLgo+ IAo+IGh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtZGZyYW5rZS1u dHAtZGF0YS1taW5pbWl6YXRpb24KCkp1c3QgYSBtaW5vciBpc3N1ZSwgYnV0IEknZCBsaWtlIHRv IGFzayB0aGUgZ3JvdXAgdG8gY29uc2lkZXIgc2V0dGluZwp0aGUgcHJlY2lzaW9uIGZpZWxkIHRv IDMyIGluc3RlYWQgb2YgMCB0byBtYWtlIGl0IGNsZWFyIHRoYXQgdGhlCnRpbWVzdGFtcHMgYXJl IGNvbXBsZXRlbHkgcmFuZG9tIGluIHRoZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBzZW5zZSB0aGF0IG9ubHkgYml0cwpi ZWxvdyBwcmVjaXNpb24gY2FuIGJlIHJhbmRvbS4gVGhpcyBtaWdodCBiZSB1c2VmdWwgaW4gZGVi dWdnaW5nIGFuZAp0cmFmZmljIGFuYWx5c2lzLgoKLS0gCk1pcm9zbGF2IExpY2h2YXIKX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KbnRwd2cgbWFpbGluZyBs aXN0Cm50cHdnQGxpc3RzLm50cC5vcmcKaHR0cDovL2xpc3RzLm50cC5vcmcvbGlzdGluZm8vbnRw d2c= From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 07:13:50 2017 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 870FC12940A for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:13:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NISRe9tnVCCm for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A00D1129534 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53FCE86DBBE for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:13:48 +0000 (UTC) To: Miroslav Lichvar , "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Post: From: "Salz, Rich via ntpwg" Precedence: list X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Reply-To: "Salz, Rich" List-Help: Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7583074720354322197==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:13:48 +0000 (UTC) --===============7583074720354322197== Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC3186D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:13:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com ([67.231.149.131] helo=mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csVOq-0000KL-B2 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:13:44 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0050093.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v2RECaU3030489; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:13:35 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=XLaiy0JSIZPn/WnTbXr27NiCEjEE1mHUC9IwBr9Qo9o=; b=l96MhclYgB4Sg3PSKLftXWBpccPrXTA2z1fxBZ6ofaKiUX9YR+k4WhLnQxHeLlSol1aI bIOOrhK29OWfGElVa0uVHK67IOznpb6GXV0bCykUskMPOyFwrzHx6XWsYU1COk8EC2aY HPVYREnHAcKzX6JQS8t4FN3cvGc05VNgAGQORLPpuR4g0J8uYcX8l9+Op5Iz7CyHuNC1 Q24Ou+VfVkvNMC8jKb3e7wooM1n6rrwH1uYdQFWYZgmkpdYwnOwTPtTXemFicCg+C9Hz eoDoKxYrjBAMgLLMheFdoCuRcK8Bgc8dB+iH35TpObdrYC/Y23N8U9mTjlI6fmBgITFX vw== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (a184-51-33-19.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 29dgpqsm7e-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:13:34 +0100 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v2RE1QOm028326; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:13:33 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.34]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 29dkvu8uc8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:13:33 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:13:32 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:13:32 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Miroslav Lichvar , "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) Thread-Index: AQHSpns4+7sbKLi2SUq/3VU0hMMlk6Go9P0A///EykA= Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:13:31 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.35.191] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-03-27_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1703270121 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-03-27_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1703270122 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.231.149.131 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: rsalz@akamai.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on mail1.ntp.org X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL,KHOP_DYNAMIC autolearn=no version=3.3.2 Subject: RE: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) PiBKdXN0IGEgbWlub3IgaXNzdWUsIGJ1dCBJJ2QgbGlrZSB0byBhc2sgdGhlIGdyb3VwIHRvIGNv bnNpZGVyIC4uLg0KDQpKdXN0IGFzIGEgcG9pbnQgb2YgY2xhcmlmaWNhdGlvbiwgYWRvcHRpb24g bWVhbnMgdGhlIFdHIHdhbnRzIHRvIHRha2UgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGFuZCBzdGFydCBtYWtpbmcg Y2hhbmdlcy4gIE5vdCB0aGF0IGl0J3MgZ29vZCBhbmQgcmVhZHkgdG8gZ28gYXMtaXMuDQoNCg== --===============7583074720354322197== 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 --===============7583074720354322197==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 07:15:34 2017 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 9F210129415 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:15:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.29 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p_r4BuN46LJH for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:15:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2C88127010 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC8886DBAC for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:15:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9F986D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:15:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it0-f53.google.com ([209.85.214.53]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csVQW-0000P1-1R for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:15:27 +0000 Received: by mail-it0-f53.google.com with SMTP id e75so22118897itd.1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:15:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=pXyhohYBzJlnWKDd+6GmIvD65Jcn7lDuHXnba1yQy8w=; b=P/OjNGOYFfZfrTMh4Y/68F9Hu0yivCE6qcPu3ykUolNue9RlTnC1g8rzK1tuct2IfA EdTgCQyhOLtwMzHHjZ7Z7y0Vj/rP2nBVqxxDAA03YMRSn1nv2MGZ9eT8nnhtEVk4wC1h ve4CN7A78bmXe5M7YbKdb+wYzrzxEgnXP7QlRQqzHq1sNdJMC2CWdCTbOQzFv8A7kbpG phP8sen3ZIbEzKlH9vllrxamZgxx1O1aqaOP+htlQ0o2Bj4KXaph6sLnJplHsDB1sx4o 9vsouh+CkzwdYuZYBpIUkul2FUgUvGBZEt8zHkPOFjPZBQzfGzfhrBgNoNz6uqjSyMYf 7hiw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pXyhohYBzJlnWKDd+6GmIvD65Jcn7lDuHXnba1yQy8w=; b=Hd4o3hvNacpjkC9bNUFn0jZ1lIJ6UTD6hKq4nF+Usj4KARGTd2d6sgzyRQdPVMdVz1 TkZBw1+0LOhKaZr5GtYu0fr90HADmzU4Vt04PZC+qEwbimLF/cg3UqH3OcDHiy+QlaXY m1d3oAji9c4fIXWtxLuRHt1c1tAUY+t4vJhgphjJT0NgK1pMaF+4r8Pu2/6JfNzZwiDU v3YMf/mh9sUt17bJ49kImt1Jm54QxhkL1r0pnnwL5JpL1tMGpWANS12cZG3ced1gq0a1 gkMmkgS3JlAZWBqfKzzOrzH9Jmq/PHmgdEfhe76DGSlIuw7QML0IVbdcBXfGyy92nXdt N5mQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1uxQHA07hXSr82x5xGHmE1SXJr3KMoKMsUrzlGCw/zP3JU385jv560X/woM1EjlYKDKt/wqNTF3Rzb4Q== X-Received: by 10.36.7.66 with SMTP id f63mr10213711itf.83.1490624054636; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:14:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.141.197 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 07:13:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> From: Sharon Goldberg Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:13:34 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: NR8O36dtehKtYKBxDR5M4gvEXOI Message-ID: To: Miroslav Lichvar X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.214.53 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: sharon.goldbe@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9009076257136067800==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============9009076257136067800== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143d9fa455a41054bb6f55a --001a1143d9fa455a41054bb6f55a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Miroslav, can you clarify? What section of the draft are you talking about? Sharon On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 09:52:11PM +0000, Karen O'Donoghue wrote: > > We agreed to adopt this at the last IETF meeting, but we didn=E2=80=99t= actually > issue a call for adoption. > > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp- > data-minimization > > Just a minor issue, but I'd like to ask the group to consider setting > the precision field to 32 instead of 0 to make it clear that the > timestamps are completely random in the original sense that only bits > below precision can be random. This might be useful in debugging and > traffic analysis. > > -- > Miroslav Lichvar > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > --=20 Sharon Goldberg Computer Science, Boston University http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe --001a1143d9fa455a41054bb6f55a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Miroslav, can you clarify? What section of the draft = are you talking about?

Sharon

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Mirosla= v Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 09:52:11PM +0000, K= aren O'Donoghue wrote:
> We agreed to adopt this at the last IETF meeting, but we didn=E2=80=99= t actually issue a call for adoption.
>
> https://datatracker.ie= tf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization

Just a minor issue, but I'd like to ask the group to consider se= tting
the precision field to 32 instead of 0 to make it clear that the
timestamps are completely random in the original sense that only bits
below precision can be random. This might be useful in debugging and
traffic analysis.

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



--
Sharon Goldberg
Computer Science, Bo= ston University
http://www.cs.bu.edu/~goldbe
--001a1143d9fa455a41054bb6f55a-- --===============9009076257136067800== 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 --===============9009076257136067800==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 08:32:15 2017 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 0D7C3120724 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:32:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2qLJNsr4mrdY for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:32:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 455C4126B71 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:32:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D36D586DBBF for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:32:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1865D86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:32:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f172.google.com ([209.85.220.172]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csWci-0002MI-UP for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:32:09 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f172.google.com with SMTP id f11so41654757qkb.0 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:32:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=L3+mtx6woQUwO2wjOSo9Qw3itDNQqRUpjkDIHK/rgSQ=; b=n1D1j2jjgIf8Y2CQLCqrrFED8nrB46wpvLokaFMVcjnpXGNy3HZMOq6ovKuakTw6o/ lR0cdpFIeET/PH/tjA/115mJhwMM8rOSsSj2DRokN8LaYXD2ZT7z0y5dCXdwKJoRpq1A vX/Z3PSqGG/FnFU71TXB4a+Hry5Wt5lIJ36qDYNar9LcvpwcQmmkE7g1jdLINW7BbSHv 7vFzHyV8TwkipWpQoO7ph4tjA8D/IcFrDBEcvkDvkKZhh2SomU9uiz6/gfEgOMIGtMD9 5xzt14i805d9yv/pXXGQwAC0s/JSQcxsAymaEd8ZIhwUsfusL1L7QQO2qCEWIdh+QyvZ ETQw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=L3+mtx6woQUwO2wjOSo9Qw3itDNQqRUpjkDIHK/rgSQ=; b=gloPNcWxWOnC/ZBWNLWDeE3ZB5MFIAYsX2to0s7/3GryQnlMDwkV6u97Qi6//qWeY1 7IRsp9oQY815F5r+2v3gPRNfq7DUADLGZcAKfgJ/SesQVUZPnUarzdzYfa2slnpGqh8q 5xjh35rNE8YLbq/kL69+pQBkGQ7nExNs8rVc4REPk5SiOzigoBRuuRM4dRDuDN+udhRZ Yc6FRYFjS1YctuUNebdkyFebmkLyl9ogj4M1LkitG6nEQfQy3LDnCHYWTagDnOJ8VHx5 Y/idSIWMZo5EuUkdiZBnOZ4XMMSSmIpliU4cE4esYAAUV92xPLF98eoV6Vs5a5CFujK1 C9Rg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2xn/c8apOFj3ycqEhrlyXnT1It6i1azJG9rW4QI+cgXyWIh4z2dlh52QavpEEMEaG/SZfQnz67NbqQVQ== X-Received: by 10.55.26.160 with SMTP id l32mr18753891qkh.10.1490628720476; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:32:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:31:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:31:59 -0400 Message-ID: To: Harlan Stenn X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.172 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/26/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: > - Change the recommendation for the LI, version number and mode fields > from SHALL to MAY. > > - Change the recommendation for the Transmit Timestamp from SHALL to MAY. > > - Change the recommendation for "All the other header fields ..." from > SHALL to MAY. I think there's a reasonable case to made that all the MUSTs for the client should change to SHOULD, since the behavior doesn't impact interoperability and is only for the client's own benefit. But I think MAY is clearly inappropriate and defeats the purpose of the document. The language specifying that servers MUST accept packets that conform to these recommendations *does* impact interoperability and has to stay. (This requirement is the only reason that this document is intended for standards track status; otherwise it cold be informational). > Section 4.2: > > Delete the last paragraph: > > The traditional behavior of the NTP reference implementation is to > randomize only a few (typically 10-15 depending on the precision of > the system clock) low-order bits of transmit timestamp, with all > higher bits representing the system time, as measured just before the > packet was sent. This is suboptimal, because with so few random > bits, an adversary sending spoofed packets at high volume will have a > good chance of correctly guessing a valid origin timestamp. > > It is incomplete and contains inaccuracies, aside from its inflammatory > characteristics. What would you add to correct the incompleteness? What are the inaccuracies? What statements do you regard as inflammatory and how would you temper them? _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 08:35:53 2017 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 E522F129461 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:35:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28Ki6JlO7KJG for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADCBA129405 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B35D86DBC8 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:35:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD87286D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:35:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csWgE-0002YY-EA for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:35:47 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49F17C0528AA; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:35:37 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 49F17C0528AA Authentication-Results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 49F17C0528AA Received: from localhost (holly.brq.redhat.com [10.34.24.121]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 970027DB40; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:35:36 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:35:35 +0200 From: Miroslav Lichvar To: Sharon Goldberg Message-ID: <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.31]); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:35:37 +0000 (UTC) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.132.183.28 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mlichvar@redhat.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:13:34AM -0400, Sharon Goldberg wrote: > Miroslav, can you clarify? What section of the draft are you talking about? In section 3 there is: All other header fields, specifically the Stratum, Precision, Root Delay, Root Dispersion, Reference ID, Reference Timestamp, Origin Timestamp, and Receive Timestamp, SHALL be set to zero. My suggestion is to remove Precision from that list and add before that paragraph: Precision SHALL (or SHOULD?) be set to 32. Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right? -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 08:50:01 2017 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 0462B129456 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:50:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.399 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xx88klPbykUO for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:49:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFAB212945F for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:49:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF4F86DBC7 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:49:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4B1E86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:49:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay58.bu.edu ([128.197.228.18]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csWtr-0002tz-4H for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:49:51 +0000 X-Envelope-From: aanchal4@bu.edu Received: from mail-ot0-f200.google.com (mail-ot0-f200.google.com [74.125.82.200]) by relay58.bu.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id v2RFnJno009808 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:49:20 -0400 Received: by mail-ot0-f200.google.com with SMTP id w49so26627917otw.2 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:49:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3TpH/uwCbtoCWFr4uXARksLxx20botis6XDanMn2vQ0=; b=FbUbMr+F1LbU7NvLaDJvrQcYMT/ooQp4W0qZOaZMaswsyPU7jnABvgRe1GMaZvGwz9 nxeXAhmGV398c42cLD0Nvf1zS+Gyn2MFeH/WvrmoHa21YMdV1nKsNP8U3/A3slsFOn78 y3NzviAHEjKEbWm+ppz8bHoVo3fd6XYMz0sMMK2xKhHzsFpJiF7wSI8JTKOXQYFjMje6 /XEn+LoW9usiRV3zs56BCh+clfvAJ9dHMFIAZTNJo+E/e1wAZprCmgVNMYJaNp3tpNXl 4SKwjgshY/1yAMjOJTlkjL1XYc4nshdEnDuibIEaoU+ylSM7LfDUYRjxOP8ffOoJVsqH ZIJw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3+dQF0zjEQs7JPBdytY5y65wcEyR2IICV1JWYxEVeDPTm70KXsx/XxSFJxnhMzmSiqTBN0vT8Z4ZiG2xZh98ueVtoQVxCHJ4WI4kGAw+3HFD7ct08OTTN74wVgy2HG6uy88WoSeLiporx50ttB X-Received: by 10.202.73.150 with SMTP id w144mr9999953oia.91.1490629759631; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:49:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.202.73.150 with SMTP id w144mr9999943oia.91.1490629759336; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:49:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.74.71.87 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:48:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> From: Aanchal Malhotra Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:48:58 -0400 Message-ID: To: Miroslav Lichvar X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 128.197.228.18 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: aanchal4@bu.edu X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3043053586690939789==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============3043053586690939789== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113db6cc4c17f5054bb849e7 --001a113db6cc4c17f5054bb849e7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:13:34AM -0400, Sharon Goldberg wrote: > > Miroslav, can you clarify? What section of the draft are you talking > about? > > In section 3 there is: > > All other header fields, specifically the Stratum, Precision, Root > Delay, Root Dispersion, Reference ID, Reference Timestamp, Origin > Timestamp, and Receive Timestamp, SHALL be set to zero. > > My suggestion is to remove Precision from that list and add before > that paragraph: Precision SHALL (or SHOULD?) be set to 32. > > Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are > constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP > implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right? > Setting these fields to zero or any other constant value is fine. But it should be the same for ALL clients and for EACH request. Or alternatively, each client could randomize these fields for every request. Is there any operational issues with zeroing out these fields anyway? > > -- > Miroslav Lichvar > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > --001a113db6cc4c17f5054bb849e7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Miroslav Lichvar &l= t;mlichvar@redhat.= com> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:13:34AM -0400, Sharon Goldberg wrote:
> Miroslav, can you clarify? What section of the draft are you talking a= bout?

In section 3 there is:

=C2=A0 All other header fields, specifically the Stratum, Precision, Root =C2=A0 Delay, Root Dispersion, Reference ID, Reference Timestamp, Origin =C2=A0 Timestamp, and Receive Timestamp, SHALL be set to zero.

My suggestion is to remove Precision from that list and add before
that paragraph: Precision SHALL (or SHOULD?) be set to 32.

Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are
constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP
implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right?

Setting these fields to zero or any other= constant value is fine. But it should be the same for ALL clients and for = EACH request. Or alternatively, each client could randomize these fields fo= r every request.
Is there any operational issues with zeroing out these= fields anyway?

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

--001a113db6cc4c17f5054bb849e7-- --===============3043053586690939789== 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 --===============3043053586690939789==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 09:02:34 2017 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 5533612947A for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:02:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8ZVl18J7-YH5 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:02:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C205D1297BC for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:02:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5758586DBCB for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:32 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2CB986D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f177.google.com ([209.85.220.177]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csX62-0003EB-Ma for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:27 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f177.google.com with SMTP id d10so36569772qke.1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:02:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=W/C9TPj6FPVb50A6IEtJzXzEn1V28Qh8zED61P6mgOg=; b=LeiLshK58M+m9m8B4U4fsDOYLmMTjWpD7pCc6i3kkuxSiVIbMxQ8DckOx4/t9IJe/0 o8HcdT/sSNZDTCzT/3ZBS6mQO5PeIAyh/PZ/yUrHLXV45xLNjIAKGVJReiwA+5vbIvb7 YPgeE27YxsrkcKtXH1JhPnDzpngsyrDByMFhNK4yqleWg44Ij2q0ojPBirHZEO/EHYfz jRg83k/nfmSO3hxX6vRkxsPOrpS2mrXYf7+EKfqaCgZha0zISmMmqiW7Jr0ByMHvMh6w /iOto7dfVneVfZGLum3fAUorgTgZW/s63r92xAqyD5hBnX9wMLdgZMUH+uPUnb2IsEAY 3G6g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=W/C9TPj6FPVb50A6IEtJzXzEn1V28Qh8zED61P6mgOg=; b=V+AtYOvz8C7fgTBeAYJPcu4dkLifmSD9IwkxZTT+h1zFUNRBJpJcY/XMGJ2jWNF4Ad b9AO2PiGcxqa+FpBiHZnjcBaQSGJ26bOVKjaqAy3inuIPn/i5UCBjdBs1F1i2OZK1DtL Ja7wQsShQqh4iEEROOQHa9Vby6z3j6pWRT0PnV7WEXIe4jC8FZo+m1QOZcaVhlckBxNl hPkbBjdd7Ej42Ixmb0cuc5En//oGgZN6bU5Zjfpe6QKwSD3TZZ//sV82ZaBL3YF4Z9Nf 4Racw+r7hKNu86fvsd9owdP9VZootKIz2w5x0kQiEedgpu85JmsIfl3BO6s26NLQGkFy ZiDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1TB9AIE9Qgsdq97YrefUoUl19SiTXJfF0cbJcXkXpUFm4x8C39ZCR7PvfKiyHT7uMLk3Su6lsWkj3Wbw== X-Received: by 10.233.223.198 with SMTP id t189mr19943061qkf.292.1490630538104; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:02:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:02:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:02:17 -0400 Message-ID: To: Miroslav Lichvar X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.177 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/27/17, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:17:12AM +1000, Paul Gear wrote: >> Just a quick question: Were costs/downsides of data minimization >> discussed at the meeting? In the light of the Snapchat NTP surge last >> December, there is an argument to be made that identifying and tracking >> classes of clients (in this case, users of a badly-behaved NTP client >> library) is necessary to ensure ongoing reliability of public NTP >> service. > > Maybe the reference ID and/or reference timestamp in client mode > packets could be used as a User-Agent field? > > Some NTP implementations can be identified quite reliably by looking > at the distribution of their polling interval and setting all fields > to zero would not prevent that, but with these libraries and > applications where NTP requests are triggered randomly by some user > action, a User-Agent string would help a lot. > > The question is they would actually set that field. I think the answer to that question is almost always going to be "no", or at least often enough that there is no benefit to implementing this. It's also harmful to privacy since the user agent is information that could be used for fingerprinting. And in any case, anyone who chooses to implement something like this should put it in an extension rather than changing the semantics of an existing field. _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 09:03:06 2017 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 CBEB412945D for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:03:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.79 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pZhmny8wFNs2 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:03:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 211EC12955F for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:03:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2C7186DBC1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1354586DAF1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-cys01nam02on0050.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.37.50] helo=NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csX6U-0003Ga-Om for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:55 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-isoc-org; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=xWubx8M9AMvA1GndGhGOkit4HFRhQt+hufsbPW7t7rc=; b=stWyz+ju2HmbewpBgT6BcS7dw34AHuKZJ729p5lItiTpN7sq2yNfPVlxREg1SOZeejd+9if8rEx/CZRNMJ9HNXfiXSPaScrw8JMX/l4xi02XSTkx866Ig1fc/N5hELBqbyLGEZoZNw0d1XQYvGWd/vSereJZjtoV/qLVX01yAmA= Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.947.12; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:45 +0000 Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) with mapi id 15.01.0947.018; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:45 +0000 From: Karen O'Donoghue To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: call for adoption (draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds) Thread-Index: AQHSpxOSoNDddiPwCEOeUQ6wLramAg== Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:02:45 +0000 Message-ID: <62B126AC-E1C4-4985-AAA6-1E5CE91E42F0@isoc.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: lists.ntp.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; lists.ntp.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=isoc.org; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [31.133.144.164] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: cc9a1140-63a8-42e6-5ed5-08d4752ab52b x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423047)(201703031133053); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY4PR06MB2456; 7:uzNOC4llQ3vgjDeLcGSD9NMeewKqISddFbvOuAGqM6qoaHnWIhFe731vL77oa4N5qZQJQLZctsLLY6f1egeVi1CBK0XrIFZ3nsUF83ZZKrPhc4Mf53TasdTfzZRK2AEyGiU4InNuLmJcfvgrfXRhCQcpMbpFHRl9PCFx8Ar9KDgPB6ubts+evs1lng+K0avkORyCq+s0TDN1Y8tt4YXkaGzEg8e0Mc4+1oJ3IfBOSb7W1oXAqLxWEYGU5Ku/e29L1cEtKgc2vt48Sw7IgAqC8ByqKBojkh8FV7Y+xdQB8Ll6phNMUtOp8Q6K+4tXzIW/R0Id/MypRtcBWyqYhxGZ5Q== x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6041248)(20161123562025)(20161123564025)(20161123560025)(20161123558025)(20161123555025)(6072148); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; x-forefront-prvs: 02596AB7DA x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39830400002)(39410400002)(39450400003)(236005)(3660700001)(3846002)(6116002)(8676002)(7906003)(2501003)(5660300001)(81166006)(25786009)(102836003)(8936002)(54356999)(2351001)(33656002)(54896002)(50986999)(77096006)(66066001)(6512007)(36756003)(110136004)(2906002)(7736002)(6436002)(122556002)(6916009)(83716003)(6306002)(6506006)(3280700002)(99286003)(53936002)(86362001)(6486002)(230783001)(2900100001)(82746002)(38730400002)(189998001)(1730700003)(606005)(5640700003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; H:CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Mar 2017 16:02:45.2355 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR06MB2456 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.37.50 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) Subject: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============5912036830349895701==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============5912036830349895701== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_62B126ACE1C44985AAA61E5CE91E42F0isocorg_" --_000_62B126ACE1C44985AAA61E5CE91E42F0isocorg_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Rm9sa3MsDQoNCldlIGFncmVlZCB0byBhZG9wdCB0aGlzIGF0IHRoZSBsYXN0IElFVEYgbWVldGlu ZywgYnV0IHdlIGRpZG7igJl0IGFjdHVhbGx5IGlzc3VlIGEgY2FsbCBmb3IgYWRvcHRpb24uDQoN Cmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaGFiZXJtYW4tbnRw d2ctbW9kZS02LWNtZHMNCg0KSWYgeW91IGFyZSBpbiBhbnkgd2F5IG9wcG9zZWQgdG8gdGhlIGFk b3B0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgYXMgYSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIGRvY3VtZW50LCBwbGVhc2Ug cmVwbHkgdG8gdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdC4gV2Ugd2lsbCBiZSB0YWtpbmcgc2lsZW5jZSBhcyBj b25zZW50IGJlY2F1c2Ugd2UgZGlkIGRpc2N1c3MgdGhpcyBpbiBTZW91bC4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcywN CkthcmVuIGFuZCBEaWV0ZXINCg== --_000_62B126ACE1C44985AAA61E5CE91E42F0isocorg_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <16BDB23A2F71994B920DA30712F1620A@namprd06.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KRm9sa3MsDQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIi PjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5XZSBhZ3JlZWQgdG8gYWRvcHQg dGhpcyBhdCB0aGUgbGFzdCBJRVRGIG1lZXRpbmcsIGJ1dCB3ZSBkaWRu4oCZdCBhY3R1YWxseSBp c3N1ZSBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uLiZuYnNwOzwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48YnIg Y2xhc3M9IiI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJh Y2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1oYWJlcm1hbi1udHB3Zy1tb2RlLTYtY21kcyIg Y2xhc3M9IiI+aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1oYWJl cm1hbi1udHB3Zy1tb2RlLTYtY21kczwvYT48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNz PSIiPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPklmIHlvdSBhcmUgaW4gYW55IHdheSBvcHBvc2Vk IHRvIHRoZSBhZG9wdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IGFzIGEgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBkb2N1bWVu dCwgcGxlYXNlIHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QuIFdlIHdpbGwgYmUgdGFraW5nIHNp bGVuY2UgYXMgY29uc2VudCBiZWNhdXNlIHdlIGRpZCBkaXNjdXNzIHRoaXMgaW4gU2VvdWwuJm5i c3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFz cz0iIj5SZWdhcmRzLDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5LYXJlbiBhbmQgRGlldGVyPC9kaXY+ DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_62B126ACE1C44985AAA61E5CE91E42F0isocorg_-- --===============5912036830349895701== 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 --===============5912036830349895701==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 09:05:27 2017 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 E2872129454 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:05:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qm8reENNDrxi for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:05:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36D43126B71 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:05:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E72D386DBCD for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:05:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B16EB86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:05:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csX8r-0003PD-86 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:05:22 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A2B53D965; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:05:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 7A2B53D965 Authentication-Results: ext-mx06.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx06.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 7A2B53D965 Received: from localhost (holly.brq.redhat.com [10.34.24.121]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E63082FDE; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:05:09 +0200 From: Miroslav Lichvar To: Aanchal Malhotra Message-ID: <20170327160509.GD16225@localhost> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:05:12 +0000 (UTC) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.132.183.28 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mlichvar@redhat.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:48:58AM -0400, Aanchal Malhotra wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Miroslav Lichvar > wrote: > > Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are > > constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP > > implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right? > > > > Setting these fields to zero or any other constant value is fine. But it > should be the same for ALL clients and for EACH request. Or alternatively, > each client could randomize these fields for every request. Could this be included in the draft? > Is there any operational issues with zeroing out these fields anyway? Maybe with the exception of more difficult identification of broken implementation, I guess not. I was mostly interested in minimizing the changes that will be needed in existing (S)NTP implementations. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 09:07:04 2017 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 92BB21297E1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:07:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.79 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T_ZJAJclZfwN for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:07:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70907129469 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:06:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C1BB86DBAA for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:06:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA26F86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:06:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bn3nam01on0048.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.33.48] helo=NAM01-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXAL-0003Tb-L0 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:06:53 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-isoc-org; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=6xLU8zWKytRpTPtNdIXyauOp2sDemWDhuXYP8k261qc=; b=qMGG22gh811IrR5wtobN/WMzp3QwfyWpukzvfwygw+g0ICEyg4NYrK+wzhqbxVSmfTZsHbC2UI7x6xLfYxIOdVNSlwf2474D3XnqaKBMfFgetTj1USS2dD8PXvZYbTFPF12cXrYF+KSLEna5QQlDA6j7DeqyT6E8CMhp9oVH5Tk= Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) by CY4PR06MB2453.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.185.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.977.11; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:06:44 +0000 Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) with mapi id 15.01.0947.018; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:06:44 +0000 From: Karen O'Donoghue To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: call for adoption (draft-aanchal4-ntp-mac) Thread-Index: AQHSpxQgz9A2epNmuky6XlsX5EX4Ig== Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:06:44 +0000 Message-ID: <3200332A-1179-48FD-902D-99C165796BC5@isoc.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: lists.ntp.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; lists.ntp.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=isoc.org; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [31.133.144.164] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 5e5b594b-2b19-460b-6b2d-08d4752b4386 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2453; x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY4PR06MB2453; 7:HKS6fW+I3qMF6RjaXDrb8ZO3ZU9D13n1njn5vOsu9tzkUk9b23X5SZgXe6McsynDtNChoC8vQjspZLX1PGUIq8IzqOiJ1uY7O+j1JePXqFwxeILoID1FpORRKQZZoceyUk3PuCWI8kGBmDX1ESmbFbXxxsPZlEXzCyqN0knXqfYNdN5xfdJ6jbHSxhdZ434Y4TOyD5TT/SYDCLyrUUQVJBUSSrQGsIj2vHGt5/yD+YaKGpUWHAR2jOEmghdMdrPs5sUIQtz51F9SjEpUyR2lA73TW79UTFNR8veteYqTd3pzcJ3++V/E6qAxUTb+1/DVGURqcCdPYTd8u7y83IoIog== x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(6041248)(20161123555025)(20161123562025)(20161123564025)(20161123558025)(20161123560025)(6072148); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2453; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2453; x-forefront-prvs: 02596AB7DA x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39840400002)(39450400003)(39410400002)(230783001)(36756003)(2501003)(38730400002)(7736002)(8936002)(2900100001)(77096006)(53936002)(6916009)(82746002)(7906003)(50986999)(5660300001)(236005)(25786009)(110136004)(66066001)(83716003)(6436002)(86362001)(3846002)(5640700003)(54896002)(99286003)(6512007)(189998001)(6506006)(2351001)(606005)(54356999)(6486002)(6306002)(8676002)(122556002)(33656002)(1730700003)(3280700002)(102836003)(81166006)(2906002)(3660700001)(6116002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2453; H:CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Mar 2017 16:06:44.0536 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR06MB2453 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.33.48 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) Subject: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-aanchal4-ntp-mac) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============1125307756133074117==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============1125307756133074117== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_3200332A117948FD902D99C165796BC5isocorg_" --_000_3200332A117948FD902D99C165796BC5isocorg_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Rm9sa3MsDQoNCldlIGFncmVlZCB0byBhZG9wdCB0aGlzIGF0IHRoZSBsYXN0IElFVEYgbWVldGlu ZywgYnV0IHdlIGRpZG7igJl0IGFjdHVhbGx5IGlzc3VlIGEgY2FsbCBmb3IgYWRvcHRpb24uDQoN Cmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtYWFuY2hhbDQtbnRw LW1hYw0KDQpJZiB5b3UgYXJlIGluIGFueSB3YXkgb3Bwb3NlZCB0byB0aGUgYWRvcHRpb24gb2Yg dGhpcyBkcmFmdCBhcyBhIHdvcmtpbmcgZ3JvdXAgZG9jdW1lbnQsIHBsZWFzZSByZXBseSB0byB0 aGUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0LiBXZSB3aWxsIGJlIHRha2luZyBzaWxlbmNlIGFzIGNvbnNlbnQgYmVj YXVzZSB3ZSBkaWQgZGlzY3VzcyB0aGlzIGluIFNlb3VsLg0KDQpSZWdhcmRzLA0KS2FyZW4gYW5k IERpZXRlcg0KDQoNCg== --_000_3200332A117948FD902D99C165796BC5isocorg_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5Gb2xrcywN CjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPldlIGFn cmVlZCB0byBhZG9wdCB0aGlzIGF0IHRoZSBsYXN0IElFVEYgbWVldGluZywgYnV0IHdlIGRpZG7i gJl0IGFjdHVhbGx5IGlzc3VlIGEgY2FsbCBmb3IgYWRvcHRpb24uJm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48YSBocmVmPSJo dHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWFhbmNoYWw0LW50cC1t YWMiIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQt YWFuY2hhbDQtbnRwLW1hYzwvYT48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPklmIHlvdSBhcmUgaW4gYW55IHdheSBvcHBvc2VkIHRvIHRo ZSBhZG9wdGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IGFzIGEgd29ya2luZyBncm91cCBkb2N1bWVudCwgcGxl YXNlIHJlcGx5IHRvIHRoZSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QuIFdlIHdpbGwgYmUgdGFraW5nIHNpbGVuY2Ug YXMgY29uc2VudCBiZWNhdXNlIHdlIGRpZCBkaXNjdXNzIHRoaXMgaW4gU2VvdWwuJm5ic3A7PC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5S ZWdhcmRzLDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5LYXJlbiBhbmQgRGlldGVyPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxi ciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ib2R5Pg0KPC9odG1sPg0K --_000_3200332A117948FD902D99C165796BC5isocorg_-- --===============1125307756133074117== 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 --===============1125307756133074117==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 09:09:03 2017 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 29DB31297CA for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IqXYvk5hsiQY for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6FA51297F1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84FC986DB0C for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:08:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8D0C86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:08:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXC8-0003Wc-Uu for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:08:44 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f173.google.com with SMTP id x35so41561424qtc.2 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:08:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fda1mbdpz+PlxKMzPxWPf7OY0n9vLnzRSAWtNImc4OQ=; b=GLImkZwxFVZSkh7Li61uThvzX3F+4VYL1IAccYky1dZ6+mmqOVgUocBrSAmO43gWkL SXOqHAN274ctCGgGjEgun4AdXPySee2C2yb8KumHmmtdnkaPtuze2HDZq04ecPyPbqpI jWecoicP3hnXTzesFAZ6z115XInxhxFFwiEHjHAU/O0mbUZ/gFzHrUTfL3/DhXp/Onwq 8iLqwV4X2RByBGIsRCzN6BTgf4LNXu9LCno3z11804zNvZkG9l2YukguNrZTEVkNb3RR hEhfwVqycEC9qUB5wDgdBbvGpCM7RzFM+8QWS+uZopKv3sIIh69pLybgMNkLf27RovVb Ki7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fda1mbdpz+PlxKMzPxWPf7OY0n9vLnzRSAWtNImc4OQ=; b=NuCSAUBbm9EibZjGqDSx4P273+TDuA366HiPjHdh6zwm45x1+yXB4EBjrr0RpfQnpc Vk1UgbMo+jDtgXySVyHfbFsrSChiPIq3nkbiEgzxoqPqjNoJE0GOcsfQmaXserqPhu66 rfmFW0EyqCgdhkrN4o6RsIBswEOj9eT/R9cao5i1Ik+P2/5L5GsDHNhzxICpz6O/9IbR 10CNJIGYvfaGE3AFFrnOzx1eGqN5vBUjvCzA+hOneRy2AU1EMzzMX7+CVs8sMLVNk/7M G687ba/TQt0bbJFnl2PAz8TA7zAJ6HjoC9vQasX+G9IP7tXTS3INeHqyRiVmJ3M13xYN RyGw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0swSwl9aKeXZBpW9mRoZXtHfZJwv8v6fdY0xHjiVKcZNoFrnuRUL3hkZ/130ASABoSdbZxA/2f6sev2A== X-Received: by 10.200.58.163 with SMTP id x32mr23685542qte.123.1490630916164; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:08:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:08:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:08:35 -0400 Message-ID: To: Aanchal Malhotra X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.173 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: NTP Working Group Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/27/17, Aanchal Malhotra wrote: > Setting these fields to zero or any other constant value is fine. But it > should be the same for ALL clients and for EACH request. Or alternatively, > each client could randomize these fields for every request. > Is there any operational issues with zeroing out these fields anyway? I picked 0 rather than 32 because that's what OpenNTPD uses (and always has) and, to prevent fingerprinting, I want consistency across implementations. Otherwise I'd have no objection to changing it. Also, I marginally prefer fixed values over random ones. Randomizing these fields is pointless extra computation and could exacerbate CSPRNG flaws (c.f. the controversy a couple years ago about tls-extended-random). _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 09:09:21 2017 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 471BC12945E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1zM5x-E1bBRb for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60BC129466 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C4886DBE9 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:09:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A900886DAF3 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:09:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXCd-0003Yd-T8 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:09:15 +0000 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CA871297E6; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: IETF Secretariat To: , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.48.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149063094724.30619.80338784475242514.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:07 -0700 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 4.31.198.44 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] The NTP WG has placed draft-aanchal4-ntp-mac in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" The NTP WG has placed draft-aanchal4-ntp-mac in state Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Karen O'Donoghue) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-aanchal4-ntp-mac/ _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 09:10:12 2017 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 7D0BB129451 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:10:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5Ar5D_dFS7wJ for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:10:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33E0D12945E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:10:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E60EA86DBD7 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:10:08 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB0186DAF3 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:10:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXDR-0003ag-Tq for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:10:05 +0000 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C1811297CA; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: IETF Secretariat To: , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.48.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149063099730.30611.1636919797442034121.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:09:57 -0700 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 4.31.198.44 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] The NTP WG has placed draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" The NTP WG has placed draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization in state Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Karen O'Donoghue) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization/ _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 09:11:07 2017 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 E2C2B12946F for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:11:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 938VYWYgcCnD for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8D7129451 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF65786DBD7 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:11:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A13286D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:11:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXEM-0003cn-5P for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:11:02 +0000 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 880691297CD; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:10:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: IETF Secretariat To: , , X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.48.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149063105355.30587.16312256105022136221.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:10:53 -0700 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 4.31.198.44 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Karen O'Donoghue) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds/ _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 09:15:36 2017 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 BB08512940B for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:15:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id e5D7v3KmhRND for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:15:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F23B126B71 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:15:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB6B586DBDA for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:15:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6161486D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:15:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f171.google.com ([209.85.220.171]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXIh-0003jv-S6 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:15:31 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f171.google.com with SMTP id d10so36945307qke.1 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:15:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lC30tl9PuGUh3hCSfCmTInX0vUeVy0+HIpU/2wwT6mQ=; b=G5tzIkY+y+Lwx0c5Y+Z0NWWEIxqW7UZKQWngmp1DT2iXHe+aqcZ0IZZGILCmXibIlX H8Ge9ZLKHJKSBB4QqBhO/nFTkaKIq/dtHWkTFKQYnCGlHNVmRGfzSANN/84wOfiHDFjN XXr4GqS9b0PZnlv+qX8GG7UlVg9AUv1fx6Yqv2mWMrMMVHA/bVa73r0Dr1WzakoK9SC4 WHTaHZZ/kLCoJvWzGmAQ8vR/AQ7GORBkEk6Gj72kRR/e8lwS9kudLK+VrT3ZBHCmLjnm mxukrheOIg3H3trrF6BSiDIPcrX1muUZCr5IS/Oizgp65TTwqVMBAf1Ky85GsL6Ye1mC q8bQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lC30tl9PuGUh3hCSfCmTInX0vUeVy0+HIpU/2wwT6mQ=; b=ZhoWd+mIQPO9d0YXadUDPt1ZLDdiz9PFIUbSppgHhQ0Js1GYxolMFvH4/SgmCjdptO LAn0Jvv87v/OrMdccKQXOzBGFrkkgiwxk2qIDEdKxneqWROoJjBgu2jEVXDOTTbB74Vb EyLwGlhn+CJ2FGCxakRWztuRmoAGf2aOxt0k3knU+lpu9LwhRW9cV0DjNCnsnRvjc2RO grMAhabLiWMfX4oCPDYW6lHOU7H3CuuR69j6+ZIlTuUpOYiHMEfoqQlkG2+PMj5+Or4j //XtKKs1NkwM72lLE7vhB23bUwu+1dg/Q0nglMFfTysZ2INz1cikOHMVrxkkpQDHB/hx NvXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3/M+JAF4CTKzsCUiKUtkaazxmrthCAAjYrCGJTdECs2maRIWHQLMcjPoBTJ/dB8dAw02d1veSofDGhtw== X-Received: by 10.55.123.66 with SMTP id w63mr19823811qkc.301.1490631323167; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:15:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:15:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3200332A-1179-48FD-902D-99C165796BC5@isoc.org> References: <3200332A-1179-48FD-902D-99C165796BC5@isoc.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:15:22 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Karen O'Donoghue" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.171 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-aanchal4-ntp-mac) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" T24gMy8yNy8xNywgS2FyZW4gTydEb25vZ2h1ZSA8b2Rvbm9naHVlQGlzb2Mub3JnPiB3cm90ZToK PiBGb2xrcywKPgo+IFdlIGFncmVlZCB0byBhZG9wdCB0aGlzIGF0IHRoZSBsYXN0IElFVEYgbWVl dGluZywgYnV0IHdlIGRpZG7igJl0IGFjdHVhbGx5Cj4gaXNzdWUgYSBjYWxsIGZvciBhZG9wdGlv bi4KPgo+IGh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtYWFuY2hh bDQtbnRwLW1hYwo+Cj4gSWYgeW91IGFyZSBpbiBhbnkgd2F5IG9wcG9zZWQgdG8gdGhlIGFkb3B0 aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQgYXMgYSB3b3JraW5nCj4gZ3JvdXAgZG9jdW1lbnQsIHBsZWFzZSBy ZXBseSB0byB0aGUgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0LiBXZSB3aWxsIGJlIHRha2luZyBzaWxlbmNlCj4gYXMg Y29uc2VudCBiZWNhdXNlIHdlIGRpZCBkaXNjdXNzIHRoaXMgaW4gU2VvdWwuCgpJIHRoaW5rIHRo YXQgZnJvbSB0aGUgdGltZSB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IGlzIGFkb3B0ZWQgdG8gdGhlIHRpbWUgaXQKYWR2 YW5jZXMgb3V0IG9mIHRoZSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwLCBpdCB3aWxsIG5lZWQgdG8gdW5kZXJnbyBh CnNpZ25pZmljYW50IGNoYW5nZSBpbiBjaGFyYWN0ZXIsIHRvIGdvIGZyb20gYmVpbmcgYSBicm9h ZCBkaXNjdXNzaW9uCm9mIGFsdGVybmF0aXZlcyBhbmQgdHJhZGUtb2ZmcyB0byBiZWluZyBhIHNw ZWNpZmljYXRpb24gZm9yCkFFUy1DTUFDLWJhc2VkIGF1dGhlbnRpY2F0aW9uLiBXaXRoIHRoYXQg c2FpZCwgSSBzdXBwb3J0IGFkb3B0aW9uLgpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwpudHB3ZyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKbnRwd2dAbGlzdHMubnRwLm9yZwpo dHRwOi8vbGlzdHMubnRwLm9yZy9saXN0aW5mby9udHB3Zw== From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 09:16:52 2017 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 4ED0E12946D for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:16:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.592 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.592 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zps78zFhHugh for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:16:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1C49129466 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:16:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B074886DBDC for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:16:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C49486D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:16:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f170.google.com ([209.85.216.170]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXJw-0003nd-Bq for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:16:47 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f170.google.com with SMTP id i34so41940274qtc.0 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:16:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VqoPrzHU06lEE34Dg5V3SobUdgMqYa0AYAe5WuV+/Yo=; b=F7+QDh9+2wXc9h/ETiMV8sx7ng0pSce2/U8u+LxRaKZ+ehpPSS5AnYleoFxAtDl0Kx Xs0q1BQTARxCYqvR0Lj2SZtw7zCSK5DdhgPSSdyaCsP2PELIf+sgXlh2r2NtoszKp/k1 hIS2G9eEDIpPrORegKqvsgONOrSF+IcdYni1kkbMe7PSOCtsQ1xLF+Ki3IBsQxfbtiUt 5vhXQRGDwhu8OTFVLRYQ7bJn7cu8UXHULboU0POlXCtuZPBd7AWVZVpAOnSichpfOsLF 7VTSp1539NH8WN5AwrRtpqXOrRKBTg3xm9x/3EmSnyfzqW9BBssNr4hUh+9V17tR7MfR yt6w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VqoPrzHU06lEE34Dg5V3SobUdgMqYa0AYAe5WuV+/Yo=; b=SCF2SeH8JM2c0YwO4usfVmreaFOxzeq2ebMkEuObHGOm9lmK3LRy/Sr+DaBmgzM0nZ U0AYapfxN0iKeazzQwl15sLFt+N+PbDxvNifs2LRThTpYQZLVkseirDyQ581z0ZglG0H 3lHyDSnOlGVMvU/fwQSD/6UpmeK+54NAfHVvjv8rAGfgxLqFV/qSk9iCM8Hz/UCprb2H ySDWfmbQ4B85DGnCCSekG01d2x7i3zQXvF590HmX6At0H3Zjy/mjG6EYM3SBC4B623o5 7JLI5LfKdT5q1ai5dT9ox4uymEfZx/vUBPPj7MyNanN9dv6EezqjOr8LvfDoAGOuYUNw NmbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1F/6/vRVYPT+0QwTnIz/H03IWMvUn4f1Ugt7SM6oQ47hT6O2voAhrU6rm72/HuAdJ9ZWQxKPRiS8Kg+w== X-Received: by 10.237.42.164 with SMTP id t33mr23544911qtd.105.1490631399800; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:16:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:16:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <62B126AC-E1C4-4985-AAA6-1E5CE91E42F0@isoc.org> References: <62B126AC-E1C4-4985-AAA6-1E5CE91E42F0@isoc.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:16:39 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Karen O'Donoghue" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.170 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" SSBzdXBwb3J0IGFkb3B0aW5nIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQuCgpPbiAzLzI3LzE3LCBLYXJlbiBPJ0Rvbm9n aHVlIDxvZG9ub2dodWVAaXNvYy5vcmc+IHdyb3RlOgo+IEZvbGtzLAo+Cj4gV2UgYWdyZWVkIHRv IGFkb3B0IHRoaXMgYXQgdGhlIGxhc3QgSUVURiBtZWV0aW5nLCBidXQgd2UgZGlkbuKAmXQgYWN0 dWFsbHkKPiBpc3N1ZSBhIGNhbGwgZm9yIGFkb3B0aW9uLgo+Cj4gaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tl ci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1oYWJlcm1hbi1udHB3Zy1tb2RlLTYtY21kcwo+Cj4g SWYgeW91IGFyZSBpbiBhbnkgd2F5IG9wcG9zZWQgdG8gdGhlIGFkb3B0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgZHJh ZnQgYXMgYSB3b3JraW5nCj4gZ3JvdXAgZG9jdW1lbnQsIHBsZWFzZSByZXBseSB0byB0aGUgbWFp bGluZyBsaXN0LiBXZSB3aWxsIGJlIHRha2luZyBzaWxlbmNlCj4gYXMgY29uc2VudCBiZWNhdXNl IHdlIGRpZCBkaXNjdXNzIHRoaXMgaW4gU2VvdWwuCj4KPiBSZWdhcmRzLAo+IEthcmVuIGFuZCBE aWV0ZXIKPgpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwpu dHB3ZyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKbnRwd2dAbGlzdHMubnRwLm9yZwpodHRwOi8vbGlzdHMubnRwLm9y Zy9saXN0aW5mby9udHB3Zw== From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 09:55:35 2017 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 D558D126B72 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:55:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.362 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.362 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_MOSTLY=0.428, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lm_yiPOCO_Ii for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:55:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B64126DDF for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:55:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B59386DB80 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:55:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 659C286D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:55:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-by2nam03on0057.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.42.57] helo=NAM03-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXvL-0004p1-Pf for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:55:28 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-isoc-org; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=ux4f3YDIeSHND2cABHkN1Xqfk4BpbOZMbUnVnHQ/Ffk=; b=u0ahsbQvkbkrHNi9d9wVq0Dw8dQALfaKu5BzT/92mA21+W99d0nnSmJGzlGEz4mBL3JPEmr5pZU7XbRl628O7ICBe7E4NYCGoWfEikrUo/SZVPJXWkyYHvK+mYJDNhTJWH7wdL7USNTFyhpfekP/eMb1iEE16p81MDfmB9YJO7k= Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.947.12; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:55:17 +0000 Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) with mapi id 15.01.0947.018; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:55:17 +0000 From: Karen O'Donoghue To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: agenda and dates for a virtual interim Thread-Index: AQHSpxrpjtx2QJgb0kSGmJFG/SPqaA== Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:55:17 +0000 Message-ID: <55B166B2-3E02-42CC-997F-4057B7442340@isoc.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: lists.ntp.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; lists.ntp.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=isoc.org; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [31.133.144.164] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 7243200c-07ef-4b16-d538-08d475320c1a x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423047)(201703031133053); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY4PR06MB2456; 7:1GQr8E2id5aqu4r7V2bzYEuZ1t5lel1nArIi+tLAdfbiFHpmQjah8spAM64EI+PKNzjcORMGKUghxZZ3uP3xhZ5JKrmamh1MR49uTvWtLpBaWgCC+B2mErGdcCZQRT/gmztO70Vp3lXaX3itW71d4+pU+CiNAkGPu9LLfBU8TT27zvV9HzKGCDu3PfELNClZadSe2pNPS8apsO41I9HS/qI2K9yf1ecspM7G28R5h90zpZeglWHTQE82NHh2B1X69NuNsyyfJUAGJMMLdqGcDwcEWNG3BDPYtLKQSO91YqiOwHTVdodE6e7vlGP4/lzeuF3GQdcuUjao2ubKWiP2wA== x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105)(192374486261705); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040422)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6041248)(20161123558025)(20161123560025)(20161123562025)(20161123564025)(201703131423047)(201702281528047)(201703061421047)(201703061406047)(20161123555025)(6072148); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; x-forefront-prvs: 02596AB7DA x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39400400002)(39410400002)(39450400003)(39840400002)(497574002)(7736002)(110136004)(36756003)(2906002)(122556002)(6436002)(6916009)(50986999)(54896002)(77096006)(66066001)(6512007)(2900100001)(6486002)(82746002)(38730400002)(189998001)(86362001)(53936002)(606005)(5640700003)(1730700003)(83716003)(6306002)(6506006)(3280700002)(99286003)(6116002)(8676002)(3846002)(7906003)(236005)(3660700001)(102836003)(33656002)(2351001)(8936002)(54356999)(25786009)(81166006)(5660300001)(2501003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; H:CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Mar 2017 16:55:17.5199 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR06MB2456 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.42.57 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) Subject: [ntpwg] agenda and dates for a virtual interim X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============1512692687111866947==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============1512692687111866947== Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_55B166B23E0242CC997F4057B7442340isocorg_" --_000_55B166B23E0242CC997F4057B7442340isocorg_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Rm9sa3MsDQoNCkhlcmUgYXJlIHNvbWUgcG90ZW50aWFsIGRhdGVzIGZvciBhIHZpcnR1YWwgaW50 ZXJpbSBpbiBBcHJpbC4gUGxlYXNlIHJldmlldyBhbmQgYmUgcHJlcGFyZWQgdG8gZGlzY3VzcyAo YnJpZWZseSkgZHVyaW5nIHRvZGF54oCZcyBtZWV0aW5nLg0KDQpQb3NzaWJsZSBkYXRlczogQXBy aWwgMTgsIDE5LCAyMCwgMjEsIDI0LCAyNQ0KVGltZTogc29tZXdoZXJlIGluIHRoZSB0aW1lZnJh bWUgb2YgMTU6MDAgLSAxNzowMCBVVEMgKDExLTEgRURUKSB0byBhY2NvbW1vZGF0ZSB0aW1lem9u ZXMuDQoNCkFsc28sIGZvciBjb252ZW5pZW5jZSBzYWtlLCBiZWxvdyBpcyB0aGUgYWdlbmRhIGZv ciB0b2RheeKAmXMgbWVldGluZy4gRm9yIHJlbW90ZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudHMsIHBsZWFzZSBqb2lu IGVhcmx5IHRvIHRlc3QgeW91ciBjb25maWd1cmF0aW9ucyBpZiBwb3NzaWJsZS4gUmVtZW1iZXIg d2UgZG8gaGF2ZSBhIHJlbW90ZSBxdWV1ZSBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IHRoYXQgZW5hYmxlcyB5b3UgdG8g YXNrIHF1ZXN0aW9ucy4gTWVldGVjaG8gaXMgeW91ciBiZXN0IGJldCB3aXRoIGEgV2ViUlRDIGVu YWJsZWQgYnJvd3Nlci4NCg0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWVldGluZy85OC9yZW1vdGUt cGFydGljaXBhdGlvbi5odG1sDQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL21lZXRpbmcv YWdlbmRhLw0KDQpSZWdhcmRzLA0KS2FyZW4NCg0KKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqDQpKb2ludCBOVFAv VElDVE9DIFdHIE1lZXRpbmdzDQpJRVRGIDk4IC0gQ2hpY2Fnbw0KTW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCwgMjAx NywgMTM6MDAgLSAxNTowMCBDRFQgKDE4OjAwIC0gMjA6MDAgVVRDKQ0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCg0KKHJlbW90ZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0aW9u IHZpYSBtZWV0ZWNobyAtIHNlZSBiZWxvdykNCg0KMS4gQWRtaW5pc3RyaXZpYSBhbmQgQWdlbmRh IEJhc2hpbmcgKENoYWlycykNCg0KTlRQIFdHIEFnZW5kYToNCg0KMi4gTlRQIFdHIHN0YXR1cyAo Q2hhaXJzKQ0KaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1oYWJl cm1hbi1udHB3Zy1tb2RlLTYtY21kcw0KaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2Mv aHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW50cC1iY3ANCg0KMy4gTmV0d29yayBUaW1lIFNlY3VyaXR5IChOVFMp DQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtbnRwLXVz aW5nLW50cy1mb3ItbnRwDQoNCjQuIE1lc3NhZ2UgQXV0aGVudGljYXRpb24gQ29kZSBmb3IgdGhl IE5ldHdvcmsgVGltZSBQcm90b2NvbA0KaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2Mv aHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW50cC1tYWMNCg0KNS4gTlRQIENsaWVudCBEYXRhIE1pbmltaXphdGlv biAoRnJhbmtlKQ0KaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1k ZnJhbmtlLW50cC1kYXRhLW1pbmltaXphdGlvbg0KDQo2LiAgTlRQIFJFRklEIFVwZGF0ZXMgKEdv bGRiZXJnL1N0ZW5uKQ0KaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFm dC1pZXRmLW50cC1yZWZpZC11cGRhdGVzDQoNCjcuIEEgWUFORyBEYXRhIE1vZGVsIGZvciBOVFAN Cmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtd3UtbnRwLW50cC1j ZmcNCg0KVElDVE9DIEFnZW5kYToNCg0KOC4gVElDVE9DIFdHIFN0YXR1cw0KaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRh dHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9yZmM4MDM5DQpodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmll dGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtdGljdG9jLXB0cC1taWINCmh0dHBzOi8vdG9vbHMu aWV0Zi5vcmcvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLXRpY3RvYy1wdHAtZW50ZXJwcmlzZS1wcm9maWxlLTA2 DQoNCjkuIFlBTkcgZGF0YSBtb2RlbCBmb3IgSUVFRSAxNTg4djINCmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNr ZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi10aWN0b2MtMTU4OHYyLXlhbmcNCg0KMTIu IEFPQg0KDQoNCg== --_000_55B166B23E0242CC997F4057B7442340isocorg_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KRm9sa3MsDQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIi PjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj5IZXJlIGFyZSBzb21lIHBvdGVu dGlhbCBkYXRlcyBmb3IgYSB2aXJ0dWFsIGludGVyaW0gaW4gQXByaWwuIFBsZWFzZSByZXZpZXcg YW5kIGJlIHByZXBhcmVkIHRvIGRpc2N1c3MgKGJyaWVmbHkpIGR1cmluZyB0b2RheeKAmXMgbWVl dGluZy4mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPlBvc3NpYmxlIGRhdGVzOiBBcHJpbCZuYnNwOzxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LWZhbWlseTogJ0hlbHZldGljYSBOZXVlJywgQXJpYWwsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTog MTJweDsgb3JwaGFuczogMjsgd2lkb3dzOiAyOyBiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMjU1LCAy NTUsIDI1NSk7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj4xOCwgMTksIDIwLCAyMSwgMjQsIDI1Jm5ic3A7PC9zcGFuPjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0ib3JwaGFuczogMjsgd2lkb3dzOiAyOyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGZvbnQg ZmFjZT0iSGVsdmV0aWNhIE5ldWUsIEFyaWFsLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmIiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyBiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMjU1LCAyNTUsIDI1 NSk7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj5UaW1lOiBzb21ld2hlcmUgaW4gdGhlIHRpbWVmcmFtZSBvZiAxNTowMCAt IDE3OjAwIFVUQyAoMTEtMSBFRFQpIHRvIGFjY29tbW9kYXRlDQogdGltZXpvbmVzLiZuYnNwOzwv c3Bhbj48L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJvcnBoYW5zOiAyOyB3aWRvd3M6IDI7IiBj bGFzcz0iIj48Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJIZWx2ZXRpY2EgTmV1ZSwgQXJpYWwsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiIGNs YXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHJn YigyNTUsIDI1NSwgMjU1KTsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2ZvbnQ+ PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJvcnBoYW5zOiAyOyB3aWRvd3M6IDI7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48Zm9u dCBmYWNlPSJIZWx2ZXRpY2EgTmV1ZSwgQXJpYWwsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFu IHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMjU1LCAyNTUsIDI1NSk7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+QWxzbywgZm9yIGNvbnZlbmll bmNlIHNha2UsIGJlbG93IGlzIHRoZSBhZ2VuZGEgZm9yIHRvZGF54oCZcw0KIG1lZXRpbmcuIEZv ciByZW1vdGUgcGFydGljaXBhbnRzLCBwbGVhc2Ugam9pbiBlYXJseSB0byB0ZXN0IHlvdXIgY29u ZmlndXJhdGlvbnMgaWYgcG9zc2libGUuIFJlbWVtYmVyIHdlIGRvIGhhdmUgYSByZW1vdGUgcXVl dWUgY2FwYWJpbGl0eSB0aGF0IGVuYWJsZXMgeW91IHRvIGFzayBxdWVzdGlvbnMuJm5ic3A7TWVl dGVjaG8gaXMgeW91ciBiZXN0IGJldCB3aXRoIGEgV2ViUlRDIGVuYWJsZWQgYnJvd3Nlci4mbmJz cDs8L3NwYW4+PC9zcGFuPjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9Im9ycGhhbnM6IDI7IHdp ZG93czogMjsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IkhlbHZldGljYSBOZXVlLCBBcmlhbCwgc2Fu cy1zZXJpZiIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHJnYigyNTUs IDI1NSwgMjU1KTsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFz cz0iIj48YnIgY2xhc3M9IiI+DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9zcGFuPjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5 bGU9Im9ycGhhbnM6IDI7IHdpZG93czogMjsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL21lZXRpbmcvOTgvcmVtb3RlLXBhcnRpY2lwYXRpb24uaHRtbCIgY2xhc3M9IiI+ aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWVldGluZy85OC9yZW1vdGUtcGFydGljaXBhdGlvbi5odG1s PC9hPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0ib3JwaGFuczogMjsgd2lkb3dzOiAyOyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+ PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9tZWV0aW5nL2FnZW5kYS8iIGNs YXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWVldGluZy9hZ2VuZGEvPC9hPjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0ib3JwaGFuczogMjsgd2lkb3dzOiAyOyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGZvbnQg ZmFjZT0iSGVsdmV0aWNhIE5ldWUsIEFyaWFsLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmIiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogcmdiKDI1NSwgMjU1LCAyNTUpOyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNw YW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvc3Bh bj48L3NwYW4+PC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0ib3JwaGFuczogMjsgd2lkb3dzOiAy OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iSGVsdmV0aWNhIE5ldWUsIEFyaWFsLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlm IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyBiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9y OiByZ2IoMjU1LCAyNTUsIDI1NSk7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj5SZWdhcmRzLDwvc3Bhbj48L2ZvbnQ+PC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJvcnBoYW5zOiAyOyB3aWRvd3M6IDI7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48Zm9udCBm YWNlPSJIZWx2ZXRpY2EgTmV1ZSwgQXJpYWwsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IGJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHJnYigyNTUsIDI1NSwgMjU1 KTsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPkthcmVuPC9zcGFuPjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9Im9ycGhh bnM6IDI7IHdpZG93czogMjsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IkhlbHZldGljYSBOZXVlLCBB cmlhbCwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZiIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsg YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogcmdiKDI1NSwgMjU1LCAyNTUpOyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNz PSIiPg0KPC9zcGFuPjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9Im9ycGhhbnM6IDI7IHdpZG93 czogMjsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IkhlbHZldGljYSBOZXVlLCBBcmlhbCwgc2Fucy1z ZXJpZiIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1j b2xvcjogcmdiKDI1NSwgMjU1LCAyNTUpOyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+KioqKioqKioqKioqKioqPC9zcGFu PjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9Im9ycGhhbnM6IDI7IHdpZG93czogMjsiIGNsYXNz PSIiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IkhlbHZldGljYSBOZXVlLCBBcmlhbCwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZiIgY2xhc3M9 IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHJnYigyNTUsIDI1NSwgMjU1KTsiIGNs YXNzPSIiPg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xh c3M9IiI+Sm9pbnQgTlRQL1RJQ1RPQyBXRyBNZWV0aW5nczwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xh c3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPklFVEYgOTggLSBD aGljYWdvPC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXpl OiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+TW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCwgMjAxNywgMTM6MDAgLSAxNTowMCBDRFQg KDE4OjAwIC0gMjA6MDAgVVRDKTwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5 bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPj09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9zcGFuPjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9 IiI+KHJlbW90ZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0aW9uIHZpYSBtZWV0ZWNobyAtIHNlZSBiZWxvdyk8L3NwYW4+ PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFz cz0iIj48YnIgY2xhc3M9IiI+DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj4xLiBBZG1pbmlzdHJpdmlhIGFuZCBBZ2Vu ZGEgQmFzaGluZyAoQ2hhaXJzKSZuYnNwOzwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNw YW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvc3Bh bj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNs YXNzPSIiPk5UUCBXRyBBZ2VuZGE6PC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9zcGFuPjwv ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9 IiI+Mi4gTlRQIFdHIHN0YXR1cyAoQ2hhaXJzKSZuYnNwOzwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xh c3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0 dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaGFiZXJtYW4tbnRwd2ct bW9kZS02LWNtZHMiIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0 bWwvZHJhZnQtaGFiZXJtYW4tbnRwd2ctbW9kZS02LWNtZHM8L2E+PC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp diBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGEgaHJl Zj0iaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW50cC1i Y3AiIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQt aWV0Zi1udHAtYmNwPC9hPjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjMu IE5ldHdvcmsgVGltZSBTZWN1cml0eSAoTlRTKSZuYnNwOzwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xh c3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0 dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1udHAtdXNpbmct bnRzLWZvci1udHAiIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0 bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1udHAtdXNpbmctbnRzLWZvci1udHA8L2E+PC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp diBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNs YXNzPSIiPg0KPC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+NC4gTWVzc2FnZSBBdXRoZW50aWNhdGlvbiBDb2RlIGZvciB0 aGUgTmV0d29yayBUaW1lIFByb3RvY29sPC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRh dHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLW50cC1tYWMiIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0 dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1udHAtbWFjPC9h Pjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJw eDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjUuIE5UUCBDbGllbnQgRGF0 YSBNaW5pbWl6YXRpb24gKEZyYW5rZSk8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFu IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL2RhdGF0 cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWRmcmFua2UtbnRwLWRhdGEtbWluaW1pemF0 aW9uIiBjbGFzcz0iIj5odHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0 LWRmcmFua2UtbnRwLWRhdGEtbWluaW1pemF0aW9uPC9hPjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xh c3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0i Ij4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTog MTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjYuICZuYnNwO05UUCBSRUZJRCBVcGRhdGVzIChHb2xkYmVyZy9TdGVu bik8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEy cHg7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9o dG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtbnRwLXJlZmlkLXVwZGF0ZXMiIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRy YWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1udHAtcmVmaWQtdXBkYXRlczwvYT48 L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7 IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48YnIgY2xhc3M9IiI+DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj43LiBBIFlBTkcgRGF0YSBNb2Rl bCBmb3IgTlRQPC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9y Zy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC13dS1udHAtbnRwLWNmZyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJh Y2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC13dS1udHAtbnRwLWNmZzwvYT48L3NwYW4+PC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFzcz0i Ij48YnIgY2xhc3M9IiI+DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxl PSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj5USUNUT0MgQWdlbmRhOjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxi ciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjguIFRJQ1RPQyBXRyBTdGF0dXM8L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48 YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1sL3JmYzgwMzkiIGNs YXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvcmZjODAzOTwvYT48 L3NwYW4+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7 IiBjbGFzcz0iIj48YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1s L2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtdGljdG9jLXB0cC1taWIiIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIu aWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi10aWN0b2MtcHRwLW1pYjwvYT48L3NwYW4+PC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSIiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHg7IiBjbGFzcz0i Ij48YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL3Rvb2xzLmlldGYub3JnL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi10aWN0b2Mt cHRwLWVudGVycHJpc2UtcHJvZmlsZS0wNiIgY2xhc3M9IiI+aHR0cHM6Ly90b29scy5pZXRmLm9y Zy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LWlldGYtdGljdG9jLXB0cC1lbnRlcnByaXNlLXByb2ZpbGUtMDY8L2E+PC9z cGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIg Y2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+OS4gWUFORyBkYXRhIG1vZGVsIGZv ciBJRUVFIDE1ODh2Mjwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi10aWN0b2MtMTU4OHYyLXlhbmciIGNsYXNzPSIiPmh0 dHBzOi8vZGF0YXRyYWNrZXIuaWV0Zi5vcmcvZG9jL2h0bWwvZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi10aWN0b2MtMTU4 OHYyLXlhbmc8L2E+PC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9zcGFuPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp diBjbGFzcz0iIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMnB4OyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+MTIuIEFP QiZuYnNwOzwvc3Bhbj48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTJweDsiIGNsYXNz PSIiPjxiciBjbGFzcz0iIj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9zcGFuPjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5 bGU9Im9ycGhhbnM6IDI7IHdpZG93czogMjsiIGNsYXNzPSIiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IkhlbHZldGlj YSBOZXVlLCBBcmlhbCwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZiIgY2xhc3M9IiI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6 ZTogMTJweDsgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogcmdiKDI1NSwgMjU1LCAyNTUpOyIgY2xhc3M9IiI+ PGJyIGNsYXNzPSIiPg0KPC9zcGFuPjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_55B166B23E0242CC997F4057B7442340isocorg_-- --===============1512692687111866947== 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 --===============1512692687111866947==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 09:58:19 2017 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 6DED4128C81 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:58:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.091 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.091 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zHjjxEodZbjQ for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:58:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDE6B1200A0 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:58:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C51186DB85 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:58:17 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D523686D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:58:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f171.google.com ([209.85.220.171]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csXy2-0004uf-Nd for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:58:13 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f171.google.com with SMTP id r142so15102158qke.2 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:58:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PjRRjxwRp4kft7Hxfyjbcq3W7cSWfKqMpP/749kB0Bg=; b=dOqZSPip1qthG394MBAdc2q1e9IVN3tsG/c2kTOSfjYc7eHkXZFoggpZ5mWjAYkTiH zS73YvK2XGbGVioOx8XNOHJFF/JdC6Tkqx+5tU1blh9Twa8Dhu2io+G5Jg/H/ntJPIGw Bj1JoEp1MLbDJNFM4N/0jwO4dcsmi3lX2k0MPqzWUYDYu6XRhNgIkAJOY9sV2rmBTum/ MJRedzEJ7ZP73PuEbY2vzUo0SDmbL0hhfaIv0drV7Yzofwh64VnT+JmiplsK9QamrCAz Ox9hirbEZxpkrzwfCEz8lHeOl89IcWTDb6aJbMnf5XtmnTzg1q0NEXHoE7wGD/2H2OtB imfQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PjRRjxwRp4kft7Hxfyjbcq3W7cSWfKqMpP/749kB0Bg=; b=O8yqnbtqfsmDN30WIduBZ/hDScL+dyphvMvdUwktZpyMkuZVrFkRi6ipBEGFEER/YQ w1/HI6eixzrbAhA+iRKSIC1sEaeBKFJzyOFsTmYFJXVwUHe27ilPtaqlCeIgBqfiSLep R8IBzxrZmSCQU7ONh5i8k9euNXHIBg8zSACyZWozTLPMqDp1d/cgWFehuxUHr2kE2dA+ 1jyIK1HpA79m3txI5x1Jxt4NEia9O4zVf4myioHydVXLT1/IBuVneqEyaU8OUbO8eIcF eA+smjpcyUPilssm5rxek17CQwl/klqD7pGMrn6jGD2644xxcWFfOqB1fXDe2b6g2xMz k6qA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H22/EFDsSLc2zeeO4YN3umSUdrECV/G7LwfNBtw6gdtK+l10UgRUjF1qA8U+PGJa4ZBzS/s+FG0iuZ21A== X-Received: by 10.233.223.198 with SMTP id t189mr20192694qkf.292.1490633886140; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:58:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:58:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:58:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55B166B2-3E02-42CC-997F-4057B7442340@isoc.org> References: <55B166B2-3E02-42CC-997F-4057B7442340@isoc.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 12:58:05 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Karen O'Donoghue" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.171 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] agenda and dates for a virtual interim X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3155770839034834415==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============3155770839034834415== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c04448e461259054bb93f18 --94eb2c04448e461259054bb93f18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have other plans for the 18th and 19th. The other dates all work. On Mar 27, 2017 11:55 AM, "Karen O'Donoghue" wrote: > Folks, > > Here are some potential dates for a virtual interim in April. Please > review and be prepared to discuss (briefly) during today=E2=80=99s meetin= g. > > Possible dates: April 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25 > Time: somewhere in the timeframe of 15:00 - 17:00 UTC (11-1 EDT) to > accommodate timezones. > > Also, for convenience sake, below is the agenda for today=E2=80=99s meeti= ng. For > remote participants, please join early to test your configurations if > possible. Remember we do have a remote queue capability that enables you = to > ask questions. Meetecho is your best bet with a WebRTC enabled browser. > > https://www.ietf.org/meeting/98/remote-participation.html > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/agenda/ > > Regards, > Karen > > *************** > Joint NTP/TICTOC WG Meetings > IETF 98 - Chicago > Monday, March, 2017, 13:00 - 15:00 CDT (18:00 - 20:00 UTC) > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > (remote participation via meetecho - see below) > > 1. Administrivia and Agenda Bashing (Chairs) > > NTP WG Agenda: > > 2. NTP WG status (Chairs) > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ntp-bcp > > 3. Network Time Security (NTS) > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp > > 4. Message Authentication Code for the Network Time Protocol > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ntp-mac > > 5. NTP Client Data Minimization (Franke) > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization > > 6. NTP REFID Updates (Goldberg/Stenn) > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ntp-refid-updates > > 7. A YANG Data Model for NTP > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wu-ntp-ntp-cfg > > TICTOC Agenda: > > 8. TICTOC WG Status > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8039 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-enterprise-profile-06 > > 9. YANG data model for IEEE 1588v2 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tictoc-1588v2-yang > > 12. AOB > > > > _______________________________________________ > ntpwg mailing list > ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > --94eb2c04448e461259054bb93f18 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have other plans for the 18th and 19th. The other dates= all work.

O= n Mar 27, 2017 11:55 AM, "Karen O'Donoghue" <odonoghue@isoc.org> wrote:
Folks,

Here are some potential dates for a virtual interim in April. Please r= eview and be prepared to discuss (briefly) during today=E2=80=99s meeting.= =C2=A0

Possible dates: April=C2=A018, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25=C2=A0
Time: somewhere in the timefram= e of 15:00 - 17:00 UTC (11-1 EDT) to accommodate timezones.=C2=A0

Also, for conve= nience sake, below is the agenda for today=E2=80=99s meeting. For remote participants, please join early to test your configura= tions if possible. Remember we do have a remote queue capability that enabl= es you to ask questions.=C2=A0Meetecho is your best bet with a WebRTC enabl= ed browser.=C2=A0


Regards,
Karen

***************
Joint NTP/TICTOC WG Meetings
IETF 98 - Chicago
Monday, March, 2017, 13:00 - 15:00 CDT = (18:00 - 20:00 UTC)
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

(remote participation via meetecho - se= e below)

1. Administrivia and Agenda Bashing (Ch= airs)=C2=A0

NTP WG Agenda:

2. NTP WG status (Chairs)=C2=A0<= /div>

3. Network Time Security (NTS)=C2=A0

4. Message Authentication Code for the = Network Time Protocol

5. NTP Client Data Minimization (Franke= )

6.=C2=A0 NTP REFID Updates (Goldberg/St= enn)
--94eb2c04448e461259054bb93f18-- --===============3155770839034834415== 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 --===============3155770839034834415==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 10:56:26 2017 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 2CBCC1293DF for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:56:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Au29v4Eu0_nc for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:56:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF4801292CE for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:56:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4BF86DBE6 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:56:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E437386D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:56:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f172.google.com ([209.85.216.172]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csYsH-0006QK-M5 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:56:20 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f172.google.com with SMTP id r45so44357975qte.3 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:56:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=mVJc4bX4W4c9jBOqCnAE4/DGifv/YOIJn44LBBLoq6s=; b=Ftkybvd9EqPmaRRtb9b8QWOoH5esmB8ddQsLU4TSYMrxJYolNJrS2QdfTioyHu8eE3 ekVZcA5Q/CD5oOeDgwmtpiffU3L48HcyH61BgfciG+O0wlpz9d6mycp/mYXAtuCTynxF 5oF74mB39j59K1FwtPptqDxCfujbXUYWPQdlmsoGhFTVgIRLaxjfo9bFkgF9UflmbjEN 5f5je5hUKbO9lLuREisqqWf6vX9j7XwHgHv4eqdLe/fDn4afEMTaXqetmXUfDYMt5JHk 1rgGvvuJLRcOhwALf5ALOuwzPM3HvsgAhN4aFUu4dpfcjnXgUEfAAxRvS9A3fUvCw7gB 57WA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=mVJc4bX4W4c9jBOqCnAE4/DGifv/YOIJn44LBBLoq6s=; b=pNuo3+8oBkMZYLJpCjYgs2AMNB3qtmKriFrEEclo3c+zX6HQByzxXlwjLniJOoa4li Di3Dl0gcJg6cqpGP5Opi9JBYAxER0EzSQymxUtw7zDObEABALF/jrGpn91Sd0lRu8QAp Ac3EWI4CX7Q/QdFiCzjdZ/3q09SEXiOXlxHE7t+ebmQ1eWxQhHgW8w7VVA1R5RNU9XwH YJn2wMWnqIAJVqSSkaLSku5lQwqCdy6mCzyyt9YNPuLOl5UgbIRdqRDC7UFG3hgzyyrp pbabpOgR7+TRLRrHZfP9oFjkrz6lrSYyXCUWTxG3W3dV9yf4GbByBiT6rnINc/yBhY6s y1dA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0/TtpsmHUD76Ojo2hfsfIPJn4xosmeLtmK5EgKmBw/tVtA8OlXFJpRgYUg8oSi2SYJfILeUWI/XEYsTg== X-Received: by 10.200.58.163 with SMTP id x32mr24246381qte.123.1490637372817; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:56:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:56:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:56:12 -0400 Message-ID: To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.172 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/26/17, Daniel Franke wrote: > The document also contains numerous references to Wikipedia and other > volatile URLs, which I'm pretty sure is contrary to IETF policy. Can > these be replaced with more durable citations? I just chatted with some of the folks at the RFC Editor desk about this point. The gist of the conversation was that the most important thing about URLs cited in RFCs is that they stable and have static content. The citations to Wikipedia can stay, but the links should point to a particular revision, not to the current one. In my judgement (i.e., I am not speaking for the RFC Editor on this), the links to ntp.org download page and bitkeeper repo should probably go away, since the former is a dynamic page and the latter is likely to change (I'm assuming that NTF is not committing to remaining on Bitkeeper indefinitely). The link to bcp38.info seems unnecessary; just citing the RFC should be sufficient. _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 13:31:18 2017 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 BD0FC12964B for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:31:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Vo4iOXy1owqc for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26E5212963F for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90D5E86DBE8 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:31:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38D8B86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:31:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csbI6-000AJx-Q1 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:31:11 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8446CB836 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:31:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 72D77B833; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:31:00 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:30:59 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 20:31:01 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d97685107506491613541 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Daniel, On 3/27/17 9:08 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: > On 3/27/17, Aanchal Malhotra wrote: >> Setting these fields to zero or any other constant value is fine. But it >> should be the same for ALL clients and for EACH request. Or alternatively, >> each client could randomize these fields for every request. >> Is there any operational issues with zeroing out these fields anyway? > > I picked 0 rather than 32 because that's what OpenNTPD uses (and > always has) and, to prevent fingerprinting, I want consistency across > implementations. Otherwise I'd have no objection to changing it. Also, > I marginally prefer fixed values over random ones. Randomizing these > fields is pointless extra computation and could exacerbate CSPRNG > flaws (c.f. the controversy a couple years ago about > tls-extended-random). It would help if you properly quoted your context. I don't see a '32' anywhere in what Aanchal said, above. Assuming this is about the poll interval, I have 2 comments: - Bluntly, OpenNTPD would not be my first choice for a source for NTP protocol experience or knowledge. - There is likely benefit to knowing the client's poll interval in certain situations so the server can recommend changes to the poll interval. This becomes more difficult if the server doesn't know what the client's poll interval is. -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 13:44:36 2017 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 08C96129646 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:44:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WTXC-fQ5QXVV for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:44:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFA73129640 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:44:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACEFE86DBE7 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:44:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22BD486D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:44:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csbV0-000Ams-2d for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:44:31 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3DB10B833 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:44:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B97D5B825; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:44:20 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:44:20 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 20:44:20 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d979a4107501999719447 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/27/17 9:02 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: > On 3/27/17, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:17:12AM +1000, Paul Gear wrote: >>> Just a quick question: Were costs/downsides of data minimization >>> discussed at the meeting? In the light of the Snapchat NTP surge last >>> December, there is an argument to be made that identifying and tracking >>> classes of clients (in this case, users of a badly-behaved NTP client >>> library) is necessary to ensure ongoing reliability of public NTP >>> service. >> >> Maybe the reference ID and/or reference timestamp in client mode >> packets could be used as a User-Agent field? >> >> Some NTP implementations can be identified quite reliably by looking >> at the distribution of their polling interval and setting all fields >> to zero would not prevent that, but with these libraries and >> applications where NTP requests are triggered randomly by some user >> action, a User-Agent string would help a lot. >> >> The question is they would actually set that field. > > I think the answer to that question is almost always going to be "no", > or at least often enough that there is no benefit to implementing > this. It's also harmful to privacy since the user agent is information > that could be used for fingerprinting. And in any case, anyone who > chooses to implement something like this should put it in an extension > rather than changing the semantics of an existing field. I still have difficulty believing that NTP is a useful fingerprinting avenue, and I still think this is pretty much a "tempest in a teapot". Does anybody have an evidence that a real problem is being solved here? -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 13:46:31 2017 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 894BA12964B for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:46:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FLjhGQVaUXmp for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C75912965D for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A32D86DBEC for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:46:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA1B186D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csbWq-000ArO-Mf for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:46:25 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DA281B833 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:46:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6956AB825; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:46:15 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:46:14 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 20:46:15 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d97a17107506468491823 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Ah, precision. Where's the problem in having the precision value be accurate? H -- On 3/27/17 1:44 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote: > > > On 3/27/17 9:02 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: >> On 3/27/17, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: >>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 09:17:12AM +1000, Paul Gear wrote: >>>> Just a quick question: Were costs/downsides of data minimization >>>> discussed at the meeting? In the light of the Snapchat NTP surge last >>>> December, there is an argument to be made that identifying and tracking >>>> classes of clients (in this case, users of a badly-behaved NTP client >>>> library) is necessary to ensure ongoing reliability of public NTP >>>> service. >>> >>> Maybe the reference ID and/or reference timestamp in client mode >>> packets could be used as a User-Agent field? >>> >>> Some NTP implementations can be identified quite reliably by looking >>> at the distribution of their polling interval and setting all fields >>> to zero would not prevent that, but with these libraries and >>> applications where NTP requests are triggered randomly by some user >>> action, a User-Agent string would help a lot. >>> >>> The question is they would actually set that field. >> >> I think the answer to that question is almost always going to be "no", >> or at least often enough that there is no benefit to implementing >> this. It's also harmful to privacy since the user agent is information >> that could be used for fingerprinting. And in any case, anyone who >> chooses to implement something like this should put it in an extension >> rather than changing the semantics of an existing field. > > I still have difficulty believing that NTP is a useful fingerprinting > avenue, and I still think this is pretty much a "tempest in a teapot". > > Does anybody have an evidence that a real problem is being solved here? > -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 13:50:56 2017 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 79C7D1294A8 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:50:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s8VTIpzkd2lw for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:50:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 214C0120727 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:50:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3DA086DBEC for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:50:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D38B86D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:50:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f180.google.com ([209.85.216.180]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csbb9-000AzL-Cp for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:50:51 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f180.google.com with SMTP id x35so48661520qtc.2 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:50:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VupXL+x1TAPlEJf6a1Faxk3AUR2dvW6+aaEvu8WdSWg=; b=ZJtx+jOpEOEz6PWHx3CcibXIYzX8tI7qBPRZKiXwSsoOH22dwtfkLewIlLMAorUVnE +/cgH5boGXN4K6iB3Kj4umK7VE8qa4z51gBK7mSr2WSqwaw9z2EhBGEuriT6OVRKYxVC kPWXpbuz66Prvp3lP5vCiAFKbf073FQjIddLKmEHrh6122p7F4K9Ol5bkkRY8PFmvwZL 1cCPb3jrL/Xrreu1dAWzFc5iMMlCK//34APKtU5iO9d4nvfoUAE2hY/krHwrw0zC2Fos HJY8WiJ38HQkWJN9d0DVmmeY2DUP8tILrOHcumWQzzzMEGEX9Q2OIrbmt5LtfTUSdCz7 eLZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VupXL+x1TAPlEJf6a1Faxk3AUR2dvW6+aaEvu8WdSWg=; b=tu9tbOQQZ6kus/JhG9S+GvNrbvGNYGjo8tbig8hKEPAUcBxpdHY5vCrJGhkHlWqc6A bxKapcYMhUoHuq9W07DDKIR5b5L1DsBZus07q2ZtI5N6wJ4v5XRQfxLINZU2BRvcZFzw dDvRKqSBrqEPwiGBKTTTSiVJsHceWS3QtuJPGd/Qkbz9NiGZ07pTuDGoHYPrhLE7fSvM ULXibvagTtkptVJbyHi7AVVTM3jITB6dO7YLjVAcOra5kLqEAzWCAQNxWZ8jcLKQ1bae +tOjCalujmff2B+385Cy6k6pYy+zmpxrqUHJirBqmj26LDimpd7YsyGK4cKHl+zzspH0 mdPw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2HjjEnjo+20iVogmeb1PH2DKERY4Zgkt3GFry+ugNM7EojB4istSQOWHXUl/daWN3e0y9BZfsnp1TZvg== X-Received: by 10.200.34.171 with SMTP id f40mr23155874qta.125.1490647842667; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:50:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:50:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:50:42 -0400 Message-ID: To: Harlan Stenn X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.180 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: > It would help if you properly quoted your context. > > I don't see a '32' anywhere in what Aanchal said, above. The context I should have included was from Miroslav upthread: My suggestion is to remove Precision from that list and add before that paragraph: Precision SHALL (or SHOULD?) be set to 32. Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right? > Assuming this is about the poll interval, I have 2 comments: > > - Bluntly, OpenNTPD would not be my first choice for a source for NTP > protocol experience or knowledge. Regardless of your opinion of OpenNTPD design choices, the facts remain that it's in wide deployment and sets the precision field to zero. Those facts alone make it a good choice for standardization since: 1. Matching an existing implementation leads to one less opportunity for fingerprinting. 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it won't break anything. > - There is likely benefit to knowing the client's poll interval in > certain situations so the server can recommend changes to the poll > interval. This becomes more difficult if the server doesn't know what > the client's poll interval is. You were confused here about which field we were discussing. Zeroing the poll interval is already a MAY in the current draft, partly because we want to allow for exactly this sort of thing. _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 13:54:05 2017 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 6F211126CC7 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:54:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pShlveoi7aJI for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:54:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA629120727 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:54:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9532D86DBE9 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:54:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95C9086D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:54:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f171.google.com ([209.85.216.171]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csbeC-000B4p-Fv for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:54:00 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f171.google.com with SMTP id x35so48731336qtc.2 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:53:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=f7Xq2Y3G5yQRvdcw117iyBE6IR3Wtm7K2NMFfoIsgvQ=; b=hjt+0w4tvGrJQFnVzn7TwCgrb0XwTVhUqag5pDSobQBycn6Ce4nb7ioxYabRmYeOuY 5X6NlOwkF1VK1eMSIgCQn8utvV+j4sGmfOCXGUGQWn39enhpZYm+IAucQACA/Ewh6g9q /upbSkOr5jmgyYXk0h3vM4YNse/60ALh5mA0NsVf8d3EwnwyBjYqOobXsUqJ+/diTikH sOLDPxtEZW81MlTZVY3JLkFtp2/FHUPQHUC9QptrJlbu/ZpOk0UgmQvEhhHtMRtQHuQQ NkzEp4MFszZjPZnhRlyaqYpV0IO2Z0yP94bX0TcSIIXA7imkQvZMCdmbf9OUZEPqndAl MiDA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=f7Xq2Y3G5yQRvdcw117iyBE6IR3Wtm7K2NMFfoIsgvQ=; b=Nv3CNqey5wJeOPgdS9/HUnLZHgN9Hbmt0l7VhH8rHGKPdsXzw8BVX6iyocvyGdRgil oz7fNRnDTVQO7mVr2onDUbIoeOSW/ifP2mcn1rVIFqq9o59brGyD5/T41lJGEcvtSNm4 FZaIfm1QAKqBS1jPY616+5EcrB9AOf5szQLx9Y70P77T2pTip0gWtOQ2nBIbB9oeT76Q j0yzm9uoIUNOmd/56JiAauunRj9wZ78YsZ2qBRoCrevO4LN48mupa80E72Hybv9Ujtfw 7Ip4ArHQiMrl51YWJ+IxOAJZXTDxuBuRTQCN0sadnfybPEsrRwXUNQf5sszpIn373ucs bGFQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0+r2xTdoKRofNJ4RpqsXYVDI/bFvYErOaiFIMv/2jPhmFoxoQ9tkWBxefNqHS4RLgn70tykg4esgGBKg== X-Received: by 10.237.36.116 with SMTP id s49mr23000332qtc.128.1490648031962; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:53:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:53:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> From: Daniel Franke Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:53:51 -0400 Message-ID: To: Harlan Stenn X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.171 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: > Ah, precision. > > Where's the problem in having the precision value be accurate? Same problem as every other field: it's data that can be used for fingerprinting. In this particular case, it's a problem even if the client never moves between networks, since the precision value carries information that can help an eavesdropper guess the client's hardware and OS. _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 13:58:31 2017 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 615D7129642 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:58:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RgD2CRrdvQaj for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D99812963D for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AECC86DBF3 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:58:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D364086D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:58:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csbiS-000BDD-QF for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:58:25 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ADE65B825 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:58:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F414B836; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 20:58:14 +0000 (UTC) To: Daniel Franke References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 13:58:13 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 20:58:15 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d97ce7107501253318459 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/27/17 1:53 PM, Daniel Franke wrote: > On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: >> Ah, precision. >> >> Where's the problem in having the precision value be accurate? > > Same problem as every other field: it's data that can be used for > fingerprinting. In this particular case, it's a problem even if the > client never moves between networks, since the precision value carries > information that can help an eavesdropper guess the client's hardware > and OS. OK, and we're back to my wondering how much of this is "conspiracy theory". -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 14:01:33 2017 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 A0136129659 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:01:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d2m9WWEV13Oz for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:01:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F9DD127601 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5520786DBF4 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:01:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93A3386D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:01:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csblM-000BKZ-9r for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:01:26 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 179C8B836 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:01:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D7914B825; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:01:13 +0000 (UTC) To: Daniel Franke References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <1513b050-1fe3-4ad7-db27-a4990810bdc8@nwtime.org> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:01:13 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 21:01:14 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d97d9a107507672921025 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/27/17 1:50 PM, Daniel Franke wrote: > On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: >> It would help if you properly quoted your context. >> >> I don't see a '32' anywhere in what Aanchal said, above. > > The context I should have included was from Miroslav upthread: > > My suggestion is to remove Precision from that list and add before > that paragraph: Precision SHALL (or SHOULD?) be set to 32. > > Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are > constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP > implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right? > >> Assuming this is about the poll interval, I have 2 comments: >> >> - Bluntly, OpenNTPD would not be my first choice for a source for NTP >> protocol experience or knowledge. > > Regardless of your opinion of OpenNTPD design choices, the facts > remain that it's in wide deployment and sets the precision field to > zero. Those facts alone make it a good choice for standardization > since: > > 1. Matching an existing implementation leads to one less opportunity > for fingerprinting. > 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it > won't break anything. If they made a suboptimal choice we should take this opportunity to make a better choice. My previous discussions on the usefulness of this sort of fingerprinting are still unanswered. There is no reason to believe that one arbitrary value for this is somehow "magical" and a different arbitrary value would be dangerous. >> - There is likely benefit to knowing the client's poll interval in >> certain situations so the server can recommend changes to the poll >> interval. This becomes more difficult if the server doesn't know what >> the client's poll interval is. > > You were confused here about which field we were discussing. Zeroing > the poll interval is already a MAY in the current draft, partly > because we want to allow for exactly this sort of thing. OK. -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 14:06:51 2017 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 4DAF3126DEE for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:06:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bOmXEVwQsTBg for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:06:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8962F12962E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:06:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47D1D86DBF3 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:06:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1293086D77E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:06:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csbqU-000BY0-Ko for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:06:46 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CBA3AB836 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:06:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF962B825; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:06:32 +0000 (UTC) To: Daniel Franke References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <0e2e0894-e765-e4e4-551a-f7b9900d0bf9@nwtime.org> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 14:06:32 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Mon Mar 27 21:06:33 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d97ed9107506117092985 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" If we're saying "our values have poor precision" there's a better argument to be made for using a positive number that is less than 128. On 3/27/17 1:58 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote: > > > On 3/27/17 1:53 PM, Daniel Franke wrote: >> On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: >>> Ah, precision. >>> >>> Where's the problem in having the precision value be accurate? >> >> Same problem as every other field: it's data that can be used for >> fingerprinting. In this particular case, it's a problem even if the >> client never moves between networks, since the precision value carries >> information that can help an eavesdropper guess the client's hardware >> and OS. > > OK, and we're back to my wondering how much of this is "conspiracy theory". > -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 19:07:10 2017 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 6C2FF129858 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:07:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u7Ao5MPb2hm7 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:07:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 855F012984B for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:07:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF58386DBFB for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 02:07:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D3B86D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 02:07:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csgXA-000J7R-Ho for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 02:07:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35B55B837 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 02:06:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1359EB825; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 02:06:54 +0000 (UTC) To: Daniel Franke References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> <0e2e0894-e765-e4e4-551a-f7b9900d0bf9@nwtime.org> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <8c0385fc-3500-4f16-d17c-5aaf28074964@nwtime.org> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:06:53 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0e2e0894-e765-e4e4-551a-f7b9900d0bf9@nwtime.org> X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Tue Mar 28 02:06:54 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d9c53e107501812518328 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" My bad - I was thinking about error bounds, not precision. I'm with Miroslav on 32 being the right value in this case. H On 3/27/17 2:06 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote: > If we're saying "our values have poor precision" there's a better > argument to be made for using a positive number that is less than 128. > > On 3/27/17 1:58 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote: >> >> >> On 3/27/17 1:53 PM, Daniel Franke wrote: >>> On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: >>>> Ah, precision. >>>> >>>> Where's the problem in having the precision value be accurate? >>> >>> Same problem as every other field: it's data that can be used for >>> fingerprinting. In this particular case, it's a problem even if the >>> client never moves between networks, since the precision value carries >>> information that can help an eavesdropper guess the client's hardware >>> and OS. >> >> OK, and we're back to my wondering how much of this is "conspiracy theory". >> > -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 21:08:29 2017 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 88AF6129874 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:08:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4JzndG5UyEzc for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921D8129875 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48B7E86DBFE for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 04:08:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64D7486D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 04:08:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csiQZ-000Mcv-Gn for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 04:08:23 +0000 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DED6C127B31; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:08:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.48.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <149067409484.30506.8690204929816907800@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:08:14 -0700 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 4.31.198.44 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: internet-drafts@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] I-D Action: draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization-02.txt X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Network Time Protocol of the IETF. Title : NTP Client Data Minimization Authors : Daniel Fox Franke Aanchal Malhotra Filename : draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization-02.txt Pages : 5 Date : 2017-03-27 Abstract: This memo proposes backward-compatible updates to the Network Time Protocol to strip unnecessary identifying information from client requests and to improve resilience against blind spoofing of unauthenticated server responses. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization-02 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization-02 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 21:18:53 2017 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 5D2761275C5 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:18:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ztSwLTp5vrhj for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D697C126DED for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90B1786DC00 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 04:18:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70AC086D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 04:18:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f175.google.com ([209.85.216.175]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csiad-000MsE-6G for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 04:18:48 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f175.google.com with SMTP id i34so54926036qtc.0 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:18:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=pvCbCeoujRt1+u8xKVgJW8u6jBEQiysn7RvZmu1L8Gc=; b=L4L4umzn/QkZSeZqgyG8erk6ifqGBEHR72SVy9PLpp/ABbG2SkT1winA2MvF9uaiNX J2+YG4kYhak97abqLrM6FTTukL1A3Xx0hjDTSgUUng0x2DMgCYP6gUJEU5WFX4NHOvE+ dUTmk70V++JnSUUGVAU01MsI/pyLHIce5xulKIFna55mpbTGDemPDQJwxooSWC+bqrME ogVCPVj9e0rDyMevVGv1aZ/jVrRUPyUfMxVdJd2wT85yL4DICl8Dp1dJ3ZhmbPyywVg8 ALb4iNFRDAN9QJa4RkEVar5i1zaKW5bVmQOhaLTEkCjXku5MW/E1E0DL1GoyGpEJUtUe z52Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=pvCbCeoujRt1+u8xKVgJW8u6jBEQiysn7RvZmu1L8Gc=; b=Tfu0WezR/hTDF9FsksuMGCDtcVlXsrhQj+706LCqrbTyqvlMc0PUkewfQvz+ZGYyVl gSG4SrcGTQ5kzSvhRNOiZ82j2zKxQdakx0ciB3lJidHAaYVVhJlXglVvi74zcqTFXS+n hJGUXWprl1KuKsuecTelXDUiWlHVxP9z3vEApvM2e6VjhWxoqiWfXYzjDjGMJ46m+yUq qotloDoKo7mJBhTnQDS+gw0bkO4zAYZK0LwQZsbssH98cLv325HsNg2vpwIQf8OEMrVl Hap+1faLFkRRwZbuHkfS9iKJQzGi/QzwotFprO5Jdx2oaATuFIVa03w7fgTbT6MjBVNO yBlg== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2I68RWg+LLhDgwd7OvDuh2mY47Ej9Vt6t12PDJeYtPdC0XmG8C6JxjORidpL5WV0aTlzwIFiH2fI4/Dg== X-Received: by 10.237.33.240 with SMTP id m45mr25714286qtc.246.1490674718639; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:18:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 21:18:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <149067409484.30506.8690204929816907800@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <149067409484.30506.8690204929816907800@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Daniel Franke Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:18:38 -0400 Message-ID: To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.175 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] I-D Action: draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization-02.txt X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" This new revision changes MUSTs for client behavior to SHOULDs, while adding an explicit requirement that servers MUST allow clients to behave this way. It also clarifies the justification for keeping zeroing the polling interval as a mere MAY. I've retained the paragraph concerning randomization which Harlan objects to, at least until he clarifies what his objections are. I've also, at least for the time being, kept the recommended value for the precision field as 0 rather than 32. We should probably resolve this with a hum. _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Mar 27 23:05:44 2017 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 E21D4126C89 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:05:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aYsn_wndBiMV for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:05:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F34C1296A6 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB23C86DBEC for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:05:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF05686D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:05:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cskFx-000Pan-Nt for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:05:33 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 3BC725AFFE for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:05:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE33C5AF38 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:05:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:05:23 +0200 Message-Id: <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:05:22 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: , References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Pj4+IE1pcm9zbGF2IExpY2h2YXIgPG1saWNodmFyQHJlZGhhdC5jb20+IHNjaHJpZWIgYW0gMjcu MDMuMjAxNyB1bSAxNTozOCBpbgpOYWNocmljaHQgPDIwMTcwMzI3MTMzODQyLkdLODE5MkBsb2Nh bGhvc3Q+Ogo+IE9uIFN1biwgTWFyIDI2LCAyMDE3IGF0IDA5OjUyOjExUE0gKzAwMDAsIEthcmVu IE8nRG9ub2dodWUgd3JvdGU6Cj4+IFdlIGFncmVlZCB0byBhZG9wdCB0aGlzIGF0IHRoZSBsYXN0 IElFVEYgbWVldGluZywgYnV0IHdlIGRpZG7igJl0IGFjdHVhbGx5Cgo+IGlzc3VlIGEgY2FsbCBm b3IgYWRvcHRpb24uCj4+IAo+PiBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9odG1s L2RyYWZ0LWRmcmFua2UtbnRwLWRhdGEtbWluaW1pemF0aW9uIAo+IAo+IEp1c3QgYSBtaW5vciBp c3N1ZSwgYnV0IEknZCBsaWtlIHRvIGFzayB0aGUgZ3JvdXAgdG8gY29uc2lkZXIgc2V0dGluZwo+ IHRoZSBwcmVjaXNpb24gZmllbGQgdG8gMzIgaW5zdGVhZCBvZiAwIHRvIG1ha2UgaXQgY2xlYXIg dGhhdCB0aGUKPiB0aW1lc3RhbXBzIGFyZSBjb21wbGV0ZWx5IHJhbmRvbSBpbiB0aGUgb3JpZ2lu YWwgc2Vuc2UgdGhhdCBvbmx5IGJpdHMKPiBiZWxvdyBwcmVjaXNpb24gY2FuIGJlIHJhbmRvbS4g VGhpcyBtaWdodCBiZSB1c2VmdWwgaW4gZGVidWdnaW5nIGFuZAo+IHRyYWZmaWMgYW5hbHlzaXMu CgpXaGF0J3MgdGhlIHByb2JsZW0gd2l0aCAwPwoKPiAKPiAtLSAKPiBNaXJvc2xhdiBMaWNodmFy Cj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KPiBudHB3 ZyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKPiBudHB3Z0BsaXN0cy5udHAub3JnIAo+IGh0dHA6Ly9saXN0cy5udHAu b3JnL2xpc3RpbmZvL250cHdnIAoKCgpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fXwpudHB3ZyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKbnRwd2dAbGlzdHMubnRwLm9yZwpodHRw Oi8vbGlzdHMubnRwLm9yZy9saXN0aW5mby9udHB3Zw== From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 23:07:35 2017 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 500BA129669 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:07:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0lSsmojJbsZ0 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62884129630 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F83486DC02 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:07:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD41586D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:07:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cskHp-000PfA-Jv for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:07:29 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 74881B836 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 053D1B825; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:07:19 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:07:19 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Tue Mar 28 06:07:20 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58d9fd98107501254845973 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" CgpPbiAzLzI3LzE3IDExOjA1IFBNLCBVbHJpY2ggV2luZGwgd3JvdGU6Cj4+Pj4gTWlyb3NsYXYg TGljaHZhciA8bWxpY2h2YXJAcmVkaGF0LmNvbT4gc2NocmllYiBhbSAyNy4wMy4yMDE3IHVtIDE1 OjM4IGluCj4gTmFjaHJpY2h0IDwyMDE3MDMyNzEzMzg0Mi5HSzgxOTJAbG9jYWxob3N0PjoKPj4g T24gU3VuLCBNYXIgMjYsIDIwMTcgYXQgMDk6NTI6MTFQTSArMDAwMCwgS2FyZW4gTydEb25vZ2h1 ZSB3cm90ZToKPj4+IFdlIGFncmVlZCB0byBhZG9wdCB0aGlzIGF0IHRoZSBsYXN0IElFVEYgbWVl dGluZywgYnV0IHdlIGRpZG7igJl0IGFjdHVhbGx5Cj4gCj4+IGlzc3VlIGEgY2FsbCBmb3IgYWRv cHRpb24uCj4+Pgo+Pj4gaHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvaHRtbC9kcmFm dC1kZnJhbmtlLW50cC1kYXRhLW1pbmltaXphdGlvbiAKPj4KPj4gSnVzdCBhIG1pbm9yIGlzc3Vl LCBidXQgSSdkIGxpa2UgdG8gYXNrIHRoZSBncm91cCB0byBjb25zaWRlciBzZXR0aW5nCj4+IHRo ZSBwcmVjaXNpb24gZmllbGQgdG8gMzIgaW5zdGVhZCBvZiAwIHRvIG1ha2UgaXQgY2xlYXIgdGhh dCB0aGUKPj4gdGltZXN0YW1wcyBhcmUgY29tcGxldGVseSByYW5kb20gaW4gdGhlIG9yaWdpbmFs IHNlbnNlIHRoYXQgb25seSBiaXRzCj4+IGJlbG93IHByZWNpc2lvbiBjYW4gYmUgcmFuZG9tLiBU aGlzIG1pZ2h0IGJlIHVzZWZ1bCBpbiBkZWJ1Z2dpbmcgYW5kCj4+IHRyYWZmaWMgYW5hbHlzaXMu Cj4gCj4gV2hhdCdzIHRoZSBwcm9ibGVtIHdpdGggMD8KCkl0IG1lYW5zICJvdXIgY2xvY2svdGlt ZXN0YW1wcyBhcmUgYWNjdXJhdGUgdG8gMSBzZWNvbmQiIGFuZCBmb3IgdGhlCmRhdGEgaW4gdGhl IHRpbWVzdGFtcCwgdGhhdCdzIG5vdCB0cnVlLgoKLS0gCkhhcmxhbiBTdGVubiA8c3Rlbm5Abnd0 aW1lLm9yZz4KaHR0cDovL25ldHdvcmt0aW1lZm91bmRhdGlvbi5vcmcgLSBiZSBhIG1lbWJlciEK Cl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fCm50cHdnIG1h aWxpbmcgbGlzdApudHB3Z0BsaXN0cy5udHAub3JnCmh0dHA6Ly9saXN0cy5udHAub3JnL2xpc3Rp bmZvL250cHdn From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Mon Mar 27 23:18:13 2017 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 BF15E128D44 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:18:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sVKB9q0b3fK4 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:18:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AA93129442 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E52486DC05 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:18:06 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB3AF86D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:18:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cskS2-000Pyq-Iq for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:18:02 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 6D7D45B1D9 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:17:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 557FB5B1C9 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:17:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:17:58 +0200 Message-Id: <58DA0014020000A1000255B6@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:17:56 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: "Daniel Franke" , References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Daniel Franke schrieb am 27.03.2017 um 19:56 in Nachricht : > On 3/26/17, Daniel Franke wrote: >> The document also contains numerous references to Wikipedia and other >> volatile URLs, which I'm pretty sure is contrary to IETF policy. Can >> these be replaced with more durable citations? > > I just chatted with some of the folks at the RFC Editor desk about > this point. The gist of the conversation was that the most important > thing about URLs cited in RFCs is that they stable and have static > content. The citations to Wikipedia can stay, but the links should > point to a particular revision, not to the current one. In my AFAIK Wikipedia has ist own proposals for citing. And even for static pages it's advisable to include the date of retrieval. > judgement (i.e., I am not speaking for the RFC Editor on this), the > links to ntp.org download page and bitkeeper repo should probably go > away, since the former is a dynamic page and the latter is likely to > change (I'm assuming that NTF is not committing to remaining on > Bitkeeper indefinitely). The link to bcp38.info seems unnecessary; > just citing the RFC should be sufficient. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon Mar 27 23:24:04 2017 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 110FF128CDB for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:24:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Akm9rAIOprCC for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:24:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC313126C89 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:24:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D414586DB9F for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:23:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08FB686D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:23:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cskXg-0000A6-Hn for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:23:52 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B4254F0C8 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E6A5B1D9 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:47 +0200 Message-Id: <58DA0171020000A1000255BB@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:23:45 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: "Daniel Franke" References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Daniel Franke schrieb am 27.03.2017 um 22:50 in Nachricht : > On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: >> It would help if you properly quoted your context. >> >> I don't see a '32' anywhere in what Aanchal said, above. > > The context I should have included was from Miroslav upthread: > > My suggestion is to remove Precision from that list and add before > that paragraph: Precision SHALL (or SHOULD?) be set to 32. > > Anyway, do the all other fields need to be zero? As long as they are > constant and not unique to the individual clients, as in most SNTP > implementations they currently are, it wouldn't be a problem, right? > >> Assuming this is about the poll interval, I have 2 comments: >> >> - Bluntly, OpenNTPD would not be my first choice for a source for NTP >> protocol experience or knowledge. > > Regardless of your opinion of OpenNTPD design choices, the facts > remain that it's in wide deployment and sets the precision field to Do you have numbers for "wide deployment"? I guess Microsoft's implementation of NTP has widest deployment, I I wouldn't take it as a reference ;-) > zero. Those facts alone make it a good choice for standardization > since: > > 1. Matching an existing implementation leads to one less opportunity > for fingerprinting. > 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it > won't break anything. > >> - There is likely benefit to knowing the client's poll interval in >> certain situations so the server can recommend changes to the poll >> interval. This becomes more difficult if the server doesn't know what >> the client's poll interval is. > > You were confused here about which field we were discussing. Zeroing > the poll interval is already a MAY in the current draft, partly > because we want to allow for exactly this sort of thing. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon Mar 27 23:36:10 2017 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 C3213129669 for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:36:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4aNFRt7yBpfY for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:36:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5849128B4E for ; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:36:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF32D86DC0A for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:36:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6F886D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:35:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cskjP-0000T9-FF for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 06:35:59 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 37A515B1F7 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:35:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C835B100 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:35:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:35:54 +0200 Message-Id: <58DA0449020000A1000255C6@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:35:53 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: "Daniel Franke" References: <20170327132230.GJ8192@localhost> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Daniel Franke schrieb am 27.03.2017 um 22:53 in Nachricht : > On 3/27/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: >> Ah, precision. >> >> Where's the problem in having the precision value be accurate? > > Same problem as every other field: it's data that can be used for > fingerprinting. In this particular case, it's a problem even if the I just did a little test among eight different servers: precision=-22, precision=-22, precision=-22, precision=-23, precision=-20, precision=-22, precision=-22, precision=-21, The hardware (and OS) of the first seven is identical; the last one has a different hardware (but same OS). Do you really thing you can fingerprint the server from precision? For challenge, I've included three more different hardwares: precision=-22, precision=-22, precision=-22, precision=-23, precision=-20, precision=-22, precision=-22, precision=-21, precision=-21, precision=-18, precision=-21, Regards, Ulrich > client never moves between networks, since the precision value carries > information that can help an eavesdropper guess the client's hardware > and OS. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mar 28 00:17:48 2017 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 656B812948F for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:17:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6b7R9hsyV1ZX for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF29129669 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF88186DC0B for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:17:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CECC386D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:17:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail150c25.carrierzone.com ([64.29.147.220] helo=mail238c25.carrierzone.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cslNe-000256-HA for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:17:36 +0000 X-POP-User: hmurray@megapathdsl.net Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69]) by mail238c25.carrierzone.com (8.14.9/8.13.1) with ESMTP id v2S7HNU0005336 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:17:25 +0000 Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F4185406061; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:17:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3 To: "Ulrich Windl" From: Hal Murray In-Reply-To: Message from "Ulrich Windl" of "Tue, 28 Mar 2017 08:35:53 +0200." <58DA0449020000A1000255C6@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:17:22 -0700 Message-Id: <20170328071722.F4185406061@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net> X-CSC: 0 X-CHA: v=2.2 cv=NLilwwyg c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=OWgXOY7Tc8w5m7k7nGX6Zw==:117 a=OWgXOY7Tc8w5m7k7nGX6Zw==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=6Iz7jQTuP9IA:10 a=i3qTA3Eh_PkPk4bJJAAA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A020203.58DA0E06.0275, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-Score: 0.000 X-CTCH-Rules: X-CTCH-Flags: 0 X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 64.29.147.220 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: hmurray@megapathdsl.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org, hmurray@megapathdsl.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" > Do you really thing you can fingerprint the server from precision? It's another fraction of a bit. Collect enough of them and you can identify a system and/or user. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 00:24:05 2017 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 BA788126C89 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:24:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8mP5VeZ6RyyI for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 020EF1293FD for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AD4286DC06 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:23:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 268D686D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:23:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cslTn-0002Hh-5m for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:23:56 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 030C359CC1 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:23:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A8C5ADF7 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:23:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:23:50 +0200 Message-Id: <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:23:47 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> In-Reply-To: <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization I'd suggest to move the explanation for transmit time randomization from "security considerations" to the actual proposal. Also with 11 to 14 bits of randomness for todays clients I wonder whether sending a bunch of 2000 to 16000 bad response packets will remain undetected by the client (in case of an attack). IMHO it would be consistent to set precision to 3 (the lowest possible precision (0.125s) where NTP will start to work) and use 29 bits of randomness then. Still a half billion attack packets might transit without being detected, but I doubt that. Ulrich _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 00:38:21 2017 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 27E851293FD for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:38:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jeeo8DcmgRPO for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:38:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324CD127876 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:38:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AF1986DC10 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:38:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F6486D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:38:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cslha-0002c9-SM for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:38:10 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2828FB836 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:38:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hms-mbp11.pfcs.com (96-41-177-107.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [96.41.177.107]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADF99B825; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:38:05 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <86fab54e-c328-a8ea-582a-fa5d7763ff1d@nwtime.org> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:38:04 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Tue Mar 28 07:38:05 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58da12dd107501943217995 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/28/17 12:23 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization >> > > I'd suggest to move the explanation for transmit time randomization > from "security considerations" to the actual proposal. Also with 11 > to 14 bits of randomness for todays clients I wonder whether sending > a bunch of 2000 to 16000 bad response packets will remain undetected > by the client (in case of an attack). IMHO it would be consistent to > set precision to 3 (the lowest possible precision (0.125s) where NTP > will start to work) and use 29 bits of randomness then. Still a half > billion attack packets might transit without being detected, but I > doubt that. The NTP Project's software will alert whenever an unexpected origin timestamp arrives. So if you start seeing thousands of these arrive you have knowledge that a bad guy is spoofing you to your server. Also, for client responses, the "gate" for using this is pretty short - it's the window between sending the initial request to the server, and the time the response comes back. I'm back to wondering how this is not a "tempest in a teapot". -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 05:30:14 2017 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 907A2126DD9 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 05:30:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.792 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.792 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=oroliagroup.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CkOrk17j6u_r for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 05:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B32F9124BE8 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 05:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7FF086DC10 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:30:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF9D186D77E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:30:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-eopbgr30077.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.3.77] helo=EUR03-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csqG7-000FZW-0D for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:30:06 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=OROLIAGROUP.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-spectracom-orolia-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=BFLJgTdWestCxxjjz1RqrCmJbhkfuzOa/+lCPZF/Heg=; b=k7xuzk5Ev7soeRaaJOlu4jruHkO8hdxls0Cy7NQMZKfKbjs1ppW7vZZU4EGPPKqXxLXB3qUSwKoNM/6eAfBMUF9oWN61PBAibt3oxa2J1of+iniYfmFgR6yJfTvzv1O3HjNE3FpYTxjXE9GHu59k8ltPe+IA0ExGe9JpZuyUJw8= Received: from AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.60.28) by AM3PR06MB1203.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.60.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.991.14; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:29:55 +0000 Received: from AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1863:750a:d1c4:ba10]) by AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1863:750a:d1c4:ba10%14]) with mapi id 15.01.0991.020; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:29:55 +0000 From: Denis Reilly To: Daniel Franke , "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 Thread-Index: AQHSplMpjzK+r/tbd0uw+/kdkWyJ76GnnRSAgAKTCfA= Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:29:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=spectracom.orolia.com; x-originating-ip: [66.193.84.98] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; AM3PR06MB1203; 7:ReH4Ksc+V9BcqV8CE6dtXFJUbOEub8gT9ON+nRajtEDbhS64EgTun9hBh+LUa0K0QV3SI1jzIVN8Re4BoRzo78UEgYnoeiv8MWJRAQ0YfK2UC8NwJT52FVktS6pKdR7Ofbk9mYd+eT0e2Oq3p/JYYnZ987o9AsnjRgjs/5adjRSNqfQ8lnij5l5aeXFK9VBu0fE1S1+4T58g3dnV/WPtH0QhB+EW5daWzJIcH03sEfK/Rhy4wQWUQTBQoKkA+XtDoS+yK+UWcN39TvHYdDQe0ya8WRuUtS4rlVQHoqJYqfPQenTjve28Mp+24ffJA84FzHg0OMpJOQMXQsf7yot3yw== x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d286c36b-00ba-4341-be4f-08d475d62444 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423060)(201703031133066); SRVR:AM3PR06MB1203; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(166708455590820)(192374486261705)(192278398808882); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040435)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6041248)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(20161123564025)(20161123555025)(20161123558025)(201703131423060)(201702281528060)(201703061421060)(201703061406060)(6072148); SRVR:AM3PR06MB1203; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM3PR06MB1203; x-forefront-prvs: 0260457E99 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(39410400002)(39840400002)(39400400002)(39450400003)(377454003)(13464003)(2950100002)(42882006)(3280700002)(6246003)(189998001)(54356999)(53546009)(76176999)(7696004)(230783001)(8936002)(1720100001)(97736004)(2501003)(5250100002)(33656002)(50986999)(25786009)(3660700001)(966004)(39060400002)(81166006)(6116002)(2900100001)(81156014)(53936002)(2906002)(8676002)(99286003)(102836003)(74316002)(229853002)(66066001)(3846002)(55016002)(6506006)(7736002)(9686003)(6306002)(6436002)(86362001)(305945005)(38730400002)(5660300001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AM3PR06MB1203; H:AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:ovrnspm; PTR:InfoNoRecords; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: spectracom.orolia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Mar 2017 12:29:55.6227 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a263030c-9c1b-421f-9471-1dec0b29c664 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM3PR06MB1203 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 40.107.3.77 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: denis.reilly@spectracom.orolia.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Daniel, You make good points on Autokey, and I like your wording better than what is currently in the document, so we'll incorporate it (or something similar to it) in the next revision. I can look for more stable URL's if sources like Wikipedia will cause a problem, so you can expect to see changes there, too. If anyone has particular suggestions for better citations, please contribute! I believe we've discussed the document's references to ntpd and ntp.conf before. I think it's more acceptable to reference implementation-specific things in a BCP than in any other IETF document -- lots of people in the community are using it, after all, and the document is a reflection of the current state of the community. Also, most of the submissions we've had so far are from people familiar with ntpd. We're happy to take submissions specific to other implementations if there are any practices that are worthwhile to share. Thank you! -- Denis Reilly | Lead Engineer | dreilly@spectracom.com (585)321-5837 This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you received this e-mail in error please note that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. -----Original Message----- From: ntpwg [mailto:ntpwg-bounces+denis.reilly=spectracom.orolia.com@lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Franke Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 5:07 PM To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 Section 5.2 Autokey contains several false or at least gravely misleading statements. > Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to > authenticate servers. By 2011, security researchers had identified > computational areas in the Autokey protocol that, while secure at the > time of its original design, were no longer secure. Autokey was never secure. The attacks discovered in 2011 were already readily tractable on 2003-era hardware, and do not depend on any sort of theoretical advances which occured in the interim. I.e., if Roettger were eight years older and had gone to grad school in 2003, I think he could have come up with this attack just as easily. > It is recommended that Autokey not be used. Know that as of the fall > of 2011, a common(?) laptop computer could crack the security cookie > used in the Autokey protocol in 30 minutes' time. If you want to use > Autokey, know that your session keys should be set to expire in under > 30 minutes' time. Where does this 30 minute estimate come from? The computational cost of attacking an autokey association is that of 2**32 short-message MD5 computations. Going by https://gist.github.com/epixoip/a83d38f412b4737e99bbef804a270c40, one Nvidia GTX 1080 GPU can perform about 25 billion MD5 computations per second, leading to a break in maximum of 172ms; the average time would be half this (86ms). In other words, an adversary with $500 in hardware resources can break your association before you've even finished the handshake. Even if the 30 minute estimate were accurate, the advice to expire session keys after 30 minutes would still be nonsensical because the attack is trivially parallelizable. If one 2011 laptop can break an association in 30 minutes, then 30 of them can break it in one minute. > If you have reason to believe your autokey-protected associations will > be attacked, you should read https://lists.ntp.org/pipermail/ > ntpwg/2011-August/001714.html and decide what resources your attackers > might be using, and adjust the session key expiration time > accordingly. What is the relevance of the clause "If you have reason to believe your autokey-protected associations will be attacked"? If you're somehow certain that it *won't* be attacked (you're running NTP over a LAN located in a remote wilderness cabin with no outside connectivity) then there is no reason to use Autokey at all. In all other situations, there is *also* no reason to use Autokey, because it won't protect you. I propose that this section be replaced with the following language: Autokey was designed in 2003 to provide a means for clients to authenticate servers. However, by 2011, security researchers had identified grave vulnerabilities leading to a complete break of the protocol in real time on commodity hardware [add appropriate citation]. It is recommended that Autokey not be used. Other issues: several sections of this document reference ntp.conf configuration directive, which are implementation-specific and not described by any standard. I question the appropriateness of this; such advice seems better placed in ntpd documentation than in an IETF document. The document also contains numerous references to Wikipedia and other volatile URLs, which I'm pretty sure is contrary to IETF policy. Can these be replaced with more durable citations? The issues with the Autokey section are sufficiently severe that I cannot support advancing this draft to the IESG in its current form. If my recommended language is substituted then I will have no objection to advancement, notwithstanding the other issues I've raised. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 07:08:32 2017 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 DF3391299DE for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:08:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oId9WxA2HU2Z for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BF8129552 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18AE786DBCA for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:08:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A435186DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:08:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csrnG-000I2d-LR for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:08:26 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f178.google.com with SMTP id r45so64726163qte.3 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:08:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ERFHjJMJnd1zA+sJ4eS6iSf4JU+glWBQPr8ji6pPqgk=; b=EQpewmS9bM4y/7lkJFCEZ2cCXTMQveuQYxINJ4tliM31vZwvdTJMTf9JWWH9z7xjHd nArMC/viHO8KE1wVAHPbeZSFagQkEtOb2+mi3+d11ejm/slJS3nmWW2j2pIoO1z/1I6L NMzRykos7vlpFTtNcEVGmRYvTDxvFziphKOLm0dklsohkHO3DknflF10IOEIlSAi29U0 fcRO1QA0squ8IF2g2tXlIctmY4gciKMAoal3buYOideFXTqFOMRdRLA2cVZvt04tSU5U 3hC6ZB2xMyHWox0sESWvAHg0/8d/HsJyQ9Ty4mzR1EnFZgHL0mgA5cb2YwEce9eO0NmE RIAg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ERFHjJMJnd1zA+sJ4eS6iSf4JU+glWBQPr8ji6pPqgk=; b=B9ojON8EmAjgCjptZsFBWRQOWmx/BUmeNz/BI6fYuBfWP4gNkrWurdH/F/n3DznVls VejeroCuxFXSbGYqKtjTXckQh58k98R0JIbLquW/EMT24Ofs3+FkacF/hm7cvRXRATEU FszAsXKFFGfRKurolv19FB2dp2DfJsEnbBqvLyQZ+Io3+O57xY/p+vCuIaUaxWMbDnjM 4JxxbUbSU+zcAbLZA40v928n0x4+JmET4G2KIGbR7xj8c4EEdC5qWZ4s6LMk/IflJzOQ ZChps7+FPl/aTx0x9X2geGxPqxramrMl3AJMDEtWXM9aZwa9rcm0WFdc1eWO1VO6TAGr iCtQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0LxTrmnfFZEuVJHxx1cnu1rkRtX8fPpso356NNmcCwBRlHFKc3g5EyeFbZAzBgst2tabm+uGTvh+WoHg== X-Received: by 10.200.52.161 with SMTP id w30mr25706510qtb.69.1490710097922; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:08:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:08:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> From: Daniel Franke Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:08:16 -0400 Message-ID: To: Ulrich Windl X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.178 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/28/17, Ulrich Windl wrote: > IMHO it would be consistent to set precision to 3 (the lowest possible > precision (0.125s) where NTP will start to work) and use 29 bits of > randomness then. Still a half billion attack packets might transit without > being detected, but I doubt that. 2**29 packets is about 541 gigabits including ethernet headers, so on a 1Gbps link is about a 0.18% chance of attacker success during the 1s MAXDIST window. On a 10Gbps link this becomes 1.8%. That's a big improvement over the status quo but still a non-negligible weakness. What's the benefit of randomizing anything less than the full 64 bits? _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 07:20:23 2017 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 B98B2129522 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:20:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TGsZNUtScnr9 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:20:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3147D1294B8 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:20:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2BC186DC01 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:20:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9088786DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:20:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1csryg-000IQ4-S0 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:20:17 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f173.google.com with SMTP id n21so65121126qta.1 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:20:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=G5pALf6uAkEyHiWg1ER5FwoqnvW9KmwVSvVXyrsypbU=; b=rOV1vHGmQobCaEBkit+WFrUUB1ML/ZCtqof7VhLGVtlTYnPskAnGHyPj1bj8scvLZA tF1hitvDTA9nOfH+Xcl8u0ERjH8+pf3dMMHcWit2JFlXF3KkFPf5nHWgQOZ4tbNkbY/M VPAv28DU6sYW08QAE5+kLtxhr+aHPbeV4a3HgRck29iTu1CMeZCVOMRbdz+1N9tQgFQI kp2TRvWq8ME+us8wv2P82U73XuB6u5hYhfwqztXBLNcyaCd11WpPESJ2hYsc0DPdUI9O dQ3F22rPtSMkHh4fAAlXfrtxtgM0GIkKCMr5TvV828EK8WI/ZxPs5WaCVnc4TjalqPsM ODsg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=G5pALf6uAkEyHiWg1ER5FwoqnvW9KmwVSvVXyrsypbU=; b=TQsW5oaXRrzoq5LeCPMghHDwXQ+ybzylYQD8+VqTrNT08EBcOU9If+7sfYP8r51nUF ngHb9yxwwsd1ZwHSJZ5A4bUBlANYKrowST8KR/RkWOrGAT+g++ZlTbHFtTRkfM85mCTu d8CZdn/ngCQdSt6tF+zg7701lu8sWtkny6ZuuIhrAtuHhzaoIOF+jNqaeNB2SUj1MT0r mFPnm4EmILklNaQmiJ1wlBJf3MeSAAMuAkj7NxrdYZ/Y/yVxE0VQjHJHWkNX1PCUVjxK 7nyojA0KpLDQuUUWmGvJTC5IGEYX2JbUqfOP9r7HkoY3eIbQgvCcW1DxWQgx1213Rynp KLug== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2pWeUf87n5lzwJi4f9bn9869xsPUcgTJ1wEScLd27HpnziAoeedNDyoPno9KARMusDO6o3bZrE7oeIFQ== X-Received: by 10.200.51.177 with SMTP id c46mr28716732qtb.55.1490710806027; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:20:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:20:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <86fab54e-c328-a8ea-582a-fa5d7763ff1d@nwtime.org> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <86fab54e-c328-a8ea-582a-fa5d7763ff1d@nwtime.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:20:05 -0400 Message-ID: To: Harlan Stenn X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.173 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/28/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: > The NTP Project's software will alert whenever an unexpected origin > timestamp arrives. So if you start seeing thousands of these arrive you > have knowledge that a bad guy is spoofing you to your server. By "alert" you mean "increment a counter whose value can be queried using ntpq". Few users know this counter exists and almost none outside this very small community check it routinely. It's absurd to demand of users that they be keeping constant vigil over the state of their ntp daemon, and any security model which assumes that they will do so is useless. Even if you *do* immediately notice the attack, what are you expected to do about it? You can either do nothing and let your clock get manipulated, or disassociate with the peer being spoofed, and if they're all being spoofed then you're left with letting your clock free-run. But with proper origin timestamp randomization, you can just ignore the attack because it will have a negligible chance of success. > Also, for client responses, the "gate" for using this is pretty short - > it's the window between sending the initial request to the server, and > the time the response comes back. That assumes the legitimate server is alive. The correct "gate" on which to base success-probability calculations is the MAXDIST parameter. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 07:26:46 2017 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 A73B41299E8 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:26:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 95K4e9l0vjBg for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831D91299E5 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:26:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3024286DC1E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:26:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22F2086DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:26:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1css4t-000IbL-EZ for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:26:41 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 4730D5B031 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:26:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292925B2A3 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:26:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:26:29 +0200 Message-Id: <58DA7293020000A10002560B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:26:27 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: "Daniel Franke" References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Daniel Franke schrieb am 28.03.2017 um 16:08 in Nachricht : > On 3/28/17, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> IMHO it would be consistent to set precision to 3 (the lowest possible >> precision (0.125s) where NTP will start to work) and use 29 bits of >> randomness then. Still a half billion attack packets might transit without >> being detected, but I doubt that. > > 2**29 packets is about 541 gigabits including ethernet headers, so on > a 1Gbps link is about a 0.18% chance of attacker success during the 1s > MAXDIST window. On a 10Gbps link this becomes 1.8%. That's a big > improvement over the status quo but still a non-negligible weakness. > > What's the benefit of randomizing anything less than the full 64 bits? IMHO, its just because ist named "transmit timestamp" and not NOUNCE. (Be are talking about a SHOULD anyway, don't we? So anyone who feel insecure may fill pure random data) Personally I'd be interested in a real system where NTP contributes most to make a system trackable. Regards, Ulrich _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 07:57:21 2017 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 415F91299FA for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:57:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UFkTw_eXe2IH for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:57:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45295129551 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D00A486DC1F for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:57:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B1D86DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:57:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cssYV-000JPY-Gr for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:57:15 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f174.google.com with SMTP id r142so38815367qke.2 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:57:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mceDJq13wQBgjPAViROllo5iNOGuOG8D9fYydy98IAU=; b=FPmjpJSeT72jkFsv4L1AP2Mg2zNDx7yDlrtf+Dzx5MAa4sXdF4OFeK7HnDiwPc+eKB b5bbHiVJa6O3s0uO0NIRMuwAPIndCLsX5PyO/d1zlA3CXVZd/9OOAKXjx+82ofgCAXYX QEflaXqrhPlBH7Fyw/cmZR1BW0KYjwOveQGugitkEdP0SEGz4m+MLvwfc8pZCviTE1Hh t1RWFBpQlA1gZkksSJZN9EaYRzGAScVKVDpb/gWsFldZ2JaBJfh3J0d3lKY4kPK8bPpq U9urngbtwc6jixMzdHX3YP8bh07+Xk4gYEMFTpk5YuDTX+ut30P9e7LmbnAVs4US1S5X 93qQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mceDJq13wQBgjPAViROllo5iNOGuOG8D9fYydy98IAU=; b=Dxopv8Y9YNlI+tMGLv8G42d6fSsF30aAnjO/5o3GLy5lCB1EJZ6FnTob2UjSrV/Bk1 sceXlGX/XdqGbTbBNKyXIwsFb2SfPP5TX7/94oUZnSX6PuTwQgAp15vpkYFHXl0plKIL HNgkTKbCd6v/Ddxu/Xs60o2SjlfxuAfXYz4sM9X02+pxDeikMzQzU1rO6qF/z8OgGmLa sLM8Il5WBYqE1oSshWJ9VjxC8XbFw8XTXWL4GmTXoEFzFHmmRcFNXc8ouqCl0/z0bKw/ 2wpCQmpGLIomhjWG2iyMbP175pFbFqxdQG4yd3uysvh0VfY+ITws/9KH00DxgNICDRqH Adag== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3OfwIFshtSKvhmscYwOwzm+uVjheCtzVii1XU0WqVOOba9oUxOVdHmD2C3XdxpPmfg0X2MSnkj8Q/sIA== X-Received: by 10.233.223.198 with SMTP id t189mr24643818qkf.292.1490713026828; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:57:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 07:57:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:57:06 -0400 Message-ID: To: Denis Reilly , ntp-chairs@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.174 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/28/17, Denis Reilly wrote: > I can look for more stable URL's if sources like Wikipedia will cause a > problem, so you can expect to see changes there, too. If anyone has > particular suggestions for better citations, please contribute! I'll see what I can dig up and send suggested text changes. > I believe we've discussed the document's references to ntpd and ntp.conf > before. I think it's more acceptable to reference implementation-specific > things in a BCP than in any other IETF document -- lots of people in the > community are using it, after all, and the document is a reflection of the > current state of the community. Also, most of the submissions we've had so > far are from people familiar with ntpd. We're happy to take submissions > specific to other implementations if there are any practices that are > worthwhile to share. My feelings on the ntp.conf references are more along the lines of "this doesn't seem right" than "this is wrong". Karen/Dieter, might I suggest requesting an early review from GEN-ART? _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 09:08:55 2017 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 45E16128CDC for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:08:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rrAfgsrzqPUi for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:08:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEC0912940E for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:08:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D1CB86DC1D for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:08:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 633CD86DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cstff-000LCt-DL for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:08:43 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f174.google.com with SMTP id r45so68144530qte.3 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:08:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=B2bdQkeKba39lnk6ffJNvROHfeWpVTqlMatbYHRrxSw=; b=f7hmlz5b0q3SxVhXf2SlwffMdPparO7WQdCUIochkvhz34/ZTPoBct7bBJbMt1KLSQ YZsSxwvZgP5eaJ9bxYx9Rrf8lwOnTkJacBc30/5R+ftQZml+TD01QEbwjQDF3yT0OjQG MZZ/+npuD2rNTKRo9iheYBAp2Cp2sUjxPYCeKTQFho+wnb8GLCgHpiFDdQ43okhJiBFC q9xMKDEjGAL9hNlyJUJPqzPF5QPNYvj96q0oBeX4Gcc9jJ22Y/lOkSGMV5ev8c1RPir9 ZjfcUK6m/Kq4O1IAobIWzb4UHPExE2PkN3Y0pPMPIhKQ0418mF99rZHmoR9IZl/3F3Ob Lm1g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=B2bdQkeKba39lnk6ffJNvROHfeWpVTqlMatbYHRrxSw=; b=QSu7rcB/pq4zhmFRR3yagKQaH0gWNcesXpmDaKHyZuUrOUFDZ6gyZYnMvmD/MpTWXE hPvpr/9Uh/WcG70XQvayE7tjnILzjRdD7SsaY8Qo4i1cfryVuc49+NmdNs6vy0nZn5Lw WGlNjpXoZQFeZGLTsBPGWEDe+Bdu+9ekfonmCy1E83gmFg8mqrtQt6V0PY4EuKhfAyVM rDE9CFk+JHaKvx1m6uyuHDMSNBBqMS9LxZwe5Fs7qVdLxfnAysbqLoZMiM58kLmY4p6b 0VGXZf+gzKuEpOxlK7foEQt4r5WGlAGyckBtz+3bD85aOtC0rt+ZMACw9USWIbAunYyK vKQw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0CaQZa+l6FDcG4XUD8rxs6Y3PJrw5VjhTv5bw/9kWq1cTK7QdiyNATMsMlyb4Xmx5+Y3u7ZOT7Z7LD3A== X-Received: by 10.200.34.171 with SMTP id f40mr27362291qta.125.1490717314643; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <58DA7293020000A10002560B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DA7293020000A10002560B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> From: Daniel Franke Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:08:34 -0400 Message-ID: To: Ulrich Windl X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.174 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/28/17, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Personally I'd be interested in a real system where NTP contributes most to > make a system trackable. Who cares whether it's the *biggest* contributor? Identifying information is cumulative. If NTP is providing any information at all which isn't perfectly redundant with other sources, then it's contributing to the problem even if other services are contributing more. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 09:13:18 2017 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 2A82B12946F for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:13:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SQqRtBnzjaeg for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63AA31286B1 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 218BC86DC28 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:13:16 +0000 (UTC) To: Daniel Franke , Ulrich Windl References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DA7293020000A10002560B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Post: From: "Salz, Rich via ntpwg" Precedence: list Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Reply-To: "Salz, Rich" List-Help: Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8466632479094966825==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:13:16 +0000 (UTC) --===============8466632479094966825== Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B1D886DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:13:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com ([67.231.157.127]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cstk0-000LQ5-I2 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:13:13 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v2SGCLlg018397; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 17:13:02 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=7TkGD2ksQIe0lrYh8XYeX++7h9k0V2ZcHs3ikN5heFg=; b=Ga3yBBWsARFlrZTROe/wliGvjiQQnPr4QOpQCTDpAGrCJjKxCEBkKxvU6t4qJixCOLsx 9+SH883H3W6jeEek4al5TPCTprkBO+k3hN2qdGV22R3kH7QneTNBgKgp9SMrx0JzdyaZ AOUfydaGZPlQRCPPQOCwMSszpMIGLk1R09p1RUfpBfTLeYQShHsSxioKWizH+et4rQuJ czTbr/Jas4peNCETgXEL03OzmZ7Fkw9vSsn3xAvPOG5D8eFga2wQbCgn3tn9BV9ZfOIx mGU20UBYkF5612t9aPG+wREgjpK06DulH+eHcirbMcmXrH+9RRHt2lY44xdYUjyjZrBm tQ== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint2 (a184-51-33-19.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [184.51.33.19] (may be forged)) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 29fsyu0msg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 28 Mar 2017 17:13:02 +0100 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v2SGB9ti022212; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:13:01 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.34]) by prod-mail-ppoint2.akamai.com with ESMTP id 29fsx681hq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:13:01 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:13:00 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 12:13:00 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Daniel Franke , Ulrich Windl CC: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Thread-Topic: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) Thread-Index: AQHSp92VV6ruoKzHYUu+HjPP3/3JI6Gqa9ZA Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:13:00 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DA7293020000A10002560B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.44.227] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-03-28_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1703280135 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-03-28_13:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1703280135 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.231.157.127 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: rsalz@akamai.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on mail1.ntp.org X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL,KHOP_DYNAMIC autolearn=no version=3.3.2 Subject: RE: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) To emphasize Daniel's point. It's not that we care that someone is using "the same" server. We care tha= t someone can correlate that knowledge with other things, such as their bro= wsing activity at home compared to their browsing history at work.=20 --===============8466632479094966825== 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 --===============8466632479094966825==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Tue Mar 28 15:24:38 2017 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 65CB5128616 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:24:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fIaHvk3VphhI for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:24:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0531129572 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AB3886DC28 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:24:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49B4E86DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:24:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f175.google.com ([209.85.220.175]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1cszXL-0004lt-KU for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:24:33 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f175.google.com with SMTP id p22so78537687qka.3 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:24:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=aZyItdr5efh4XkRQD8dg/fAzERKhr+LesATnOUtI3pc=; b=ZMkGxKO1mmUDAfgK/zvqnVOXqFkKHQL1/QWprwnoZ0cIJQ2RqXqa26Lo8ZE+Yj6otQ hTy+VadUT8n/kG3cwfVmSaEV/Gq7qLZif6Np9IEqgRADKcsvUGQjmXk7NT+T2zMtVvU/ Y2t0io9SJh+ur/hsKYzY3eY+fW/1kCsQFZVboEMHazm4t4xvJbqM3Cz9lYUVD3r5bhtb mXhE0TBUaVt/UKogwPN5tsWHbJbPWG3jCclzDX1dirPi0UDuyq45iLz4B05MA3U00mqt LEGskQn1jalqvCDaKJEmDw9Ce/X1eOvuLn0dMuJqmgBqL1AqJqlJ1PHoMujfbLvLLoU0 Mxtw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=aZyItdr5efh4XkRQD8dg/fAzERKhr+LesATnOUtI3pc=; b=WNWJtwdA5GlSDH70SU6RqVyYpt+10lZeIfQ66vl8bWbrSedhVvgzWWEoNQpRWy0aer 4O2GqOz7T3dXjyHjZAOhDJwP5mAnpOex57EX/+t2cCDhgPRoeZSeLSSMaz4pl/i20TSr Ux+6OwdBCrO0ISic6SlMgDdTjS21yXbrDMW3+PPTxpJGSYTNloqKenYQF3dn2zq0g+qu a8HxK8WoUJBGX6p9jAYvZQi37z75+pHvKtTSkdKtNuVoFF2HWSkJpV+MnwA8YsqzHpcz MHpxEq+L9AxxlECHCB4FlaV2SzHUgT1uCLMHcspt8kjig0Cauk1ehkBOVdbScHZt0HHF OR7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0tVwXK30Lx/T4Dbg4Loj8E12/Qx+r58HoCQFYtOCLlvBJOpESkUEvPH6By0wvm6g/9wEpB5CI4cngHXw== X-Received: by 10.55.123.66 with SMTP id w63mr26382252qkc.301.1490739862970; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:24:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:24:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Daniel Franke Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 18:24:22 -0400 Message-ID: To: Denis Reilly X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.175 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Repo for ntp-bcp change tracking? X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Denis, I have a bunch of editorial changes to propose for draft-ietf-ntp-bcp. It'll be a lot easier for both of us if I track them in git. Do you already have a GitHub repo somewhere that I fork from? If not I'll just create one from the current draft. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 16:23:22 2017 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 A625F126BFD for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:23:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YPqqSvsybks9 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:23:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 562A5129542 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:23:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E73A286DC2C for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:23:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D3D86DAE6 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:23:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from chessie.everett.org ([66.220.13.234]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ct0SB-0006FO-AR for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:23:15 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3558AB835 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.19] (97-90-117-231.dhcp.mdfd.or.charter.com [97.90.117.231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by chessie.everett.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C32EBB825 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:23:05 +0000 (UTC) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> From: Harlan Stenn Message-ID: <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:23:06 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-DSPAM-Result: Innocent X-DSPAM-Processed: Tue Mar 28 23:23:05 2017 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Improbability: 1 in 9809 chance of being spam X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 6384,58daf059107502638626441 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 66.220.13.234 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: stenn@nwtime.org X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/28/2017 7:08 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: > On 3/28/17, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> IMHO it would be consistent to set precision to 3 (the lowest possible >> precision (0.125s) where NTP will start to work) and use 29 bits of >> randomness then. Still a half billion attack packets might transit without >> being detected, but I doubt that. Ulrich, a precision of 3 is 8 seconds. > 2**29 packets is about 541 gigabits including ethernet headers, so on > a 1Gbps link is about a 0.18% chance of attacker success during the 1s > MAXDIST window. On a 10Gbps link this becomes 1.8%. That's a big > improvement over the status quo but still a non-negligible weakness. Daniel, you're continuing to focus on and assume that: - nobody will notice or care about these spoofs. The reference implementation from NTF/ntp.org reports these on both the client and the server side. - Once the client receives the response from the server, the origin timestamp is zeroed in the client so no more responses from the server will be accepted. This has all been said before, several times, and you continue to ignore these points. Please take a breath of fresh air. > What's the benefit of randomizing anything less than the full 64 bits? For extranet communications, I'd likely choose 64 bits. But I'd also consider this to be *my* policy choice. If somebody has good reason to pick a different number, they should be able to. I would generally not choose information hiding or extra randomizing on internal NTP traffic. -- Harlan Stenn http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 16:41:01 2017 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 33803126579 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:41:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.093 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.093 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zrit3leDmXcT for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:40:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 951B2126BFD for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:40:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF6886DC2C for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:40:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CC4786DB18 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:40:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f180.google.com ([209.85.216.180]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ct0jI-0006gq-OW for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:40:56 +0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f180.google.com with SMTP id n21so21006qta.1 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:40:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=R8nu6Ffk2vvn3GwmnIKQN4p16L9/Vy2lsAg2S5FlXu8=; b=OEAvsgBzNFqHNmExnkoQ1738qtwgC6cB3Ik9QXRq7nC0Nj9Y/QDUU2Fy43BWy7BfWe Me1rJ6+DHFlnjcN9wEbhyzaK2qW0faqy2UHe2PIkaVDHn0+Y4Kl+7KQEK5T94nHmyGfO z6yfM8xqOgQlFxiXw38CkZVaZZq//98bHQwUhNjUvskoBAHLglafAt9IVD8brKte5L3p lkZUAKYRSlQ6MZLETssFdKhOb4XfYJRDy7jJSMCYs3VOkh4l8Pafc+Uv0uHSl0Q/Sowi dUvWJL7FB46V4ywkgUcFSfl1q33xblVvozQ+8lWC1ONcqp/6GfCwbfEo5AweIaqEyVqZ GQLA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=R8nu6Ffk2vvn3GwmnIKQN4p16L9/Vy2lsAg2S5FlXu8=; b=pmnAcWTVy2Y2bRHjCTkiGB5HyxoWY9azWeiPjNmZstTVeCSuD2ZqRVkFU9e18CpsMf 3LRS4gOB99OmRC2/3k/2y8gJuFYVgRyM4Z/OtemrrYQBi9AkY6vpX5ixmkCkNHtKe1P4 RtdEqD86zfYrd9hopsE2J0MBD9HFBNX7vx7IGbxFsLHLgwsuLU4gWlEIGukeD0pAAd3N +Tc0nBnTUe96GtunqRFOaHE2lJ2usNZt+aghBTJZwgO4FcCEIO1Fss5DW1oK7XNqvlVl 1sa20XFzwt93764zHgS+Ke04TnJfk70aFUMwdFZONbdvF67bAjjT/O4Q0Ev4uTkA4yNR mhEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2Qk5rM9GAIE4zf1rW0s5XW2o2vZhXLNBlQiA4YdWxqDUjYbimDVvQkEuTpqi7RIKKY37TyBDCUZm62Lg== X-Received: by 10.237.42.164 with SMTP id t33mr31425483qtd.105.1490744447934; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:40:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:40:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org> From: Daniel Franke Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 19:40:47 -0400 Message-ID: To: Harlan Stenn X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.216.180 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/28/17, Harlan Stenn wrote: > Daniel, you're continuing to focus on and assume that: > > - nobody will notice or care about these spoofs. The reference > implementation from NTF/ntp.org reports these on both the client and the > server side. I've already addressed this upthread. Approximately zero percent of users pay attention to these reports or even know they exist or how to interpret them, and it is unreasonable to expect them to. > - Once the client receives the response from the server, the origin > timestamp is zeroed in the client so no more responses from the server > will be accepted. Again, I've addressed this upthread. If you insist on assuming a live server, then plug in something like a typical ping time and multiply the success probabilities in my calculation above by that time and divide by 1 second. I don't think this has any qualitative impact on the conclusion. > For extranet communications, I'd likely choose 64 bits. But I'd also > consider this to be *my* policy choice. If somebody has good reason to > pick a different number, they should be able to. > > I would generally not choose information hiding or extra randomizing on > internal NTP traffic. Then nobody is trying to restrain you from adding a configuration option to ntpd which allows the user to adjust this. But since the vast majority of NTP traffic does go over the internet, I'm going to continue to maintain that these timestamps SHOULD be fully randomized and recommend that you make this the default configuration. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 20:36:41 2017 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 E00471293D8 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:36:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.791 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8Kmbp5GF80eN for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDEE91292AE for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4323E86DC0D for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:36:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 714C786DAE6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:36:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-co1nam03on0045.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.40.45] helo=NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ct4PK-000Czq-Ks for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:36:35 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-isoc-org; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=DWVAj0UyXcvxzkhyT7zlbyhl7zbBZbi0D8SWUN5Sb3g=; b=rYQRSOuS4AzY29/CSp+GA9Do5wlAWlh/AUasuj0ztg2nrPfUobGeyDSjTDcvXpDWgy+Q+N7KD7fODvZcwaSX/ddWhiiMqeVjAuOX6aJbDTen8F3XBydCUAecu+bYfq9NEK6be3MYcQSY2pkIGpVpNcBBO39zX0+FB88ZG+scCDI= Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.169.186.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.947.12; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:36:23 +0000 Received: from CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) by CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.169.186.136]) with mapi id 15.01.0947.018; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:36:23 +0000 From: Karen O'Donoghue To: Daniel Franke Thread-Topic: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 Thread-Index: AQHSplMpXS5mkntKX0yknGBOWaES2qGqWoR2gADUjwA= Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:36:23 +0000 Message-ID: <36BF0983-CC2F-4D9B-9C8E-D12E9251C130@isoc.org> References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=isoc.org; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [31.133.144.164] x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 624a5da3-4d4a-48d5-c7ed-08d47654c5d8 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423070)(201703031133076); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY4PR06MB2456; 7:vZzpYE3vnYH3d92/ZbDa/uowvB1otgWMiBxtZHuud676ufBfxflKsSI3lLQK08hsYZfA3cIY/daEriny1gLFanaPjReK0jk/upEbzzE4UsUIiwZcAxoYUt+h65CZhcYdIPkrXTUmIpz+NqQVztiJGejIcid/HXF3KtkshoEr8GYcbI/NAwOIf3RW1z8InT9rKtGOKOm06sHoTo+1UI7wYdGqFlaWpAcRtBQRYE0rgLzxyGoTFEzyoSaefFQD9cj4eknlJIgM1xe/p/Db+zjhx2HMOAeUt9BPqMRB+BUi3o2Rn0OhWuK457SeSNpWDGid1bVkpAKkfBMxLoDT1G4ztQ== x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040445)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6041248)(20161123562025)(20161123555025)(20161123560025)(20161123564025)(201703131423070)(201702281528070)(201703061421070)(201703061406070)(20161123558025)(6072148); SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; x-forefront-prvs: 0261CCEEDF x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(39400400002)(39450400003)(39410400002)(39840400002)(24454002)(377454003)(2906002)(8656002)(7736002)(2950100002)(110136004)(36756003)(93886004)(6436002)(122556002)(6916009)(229853002)(50986999)(1411001)(8676002)(77096006)(54906002)(6512007)(66066001)(6486002)(2900100001)(53936002)(82746002)(4326008)(86362001)(39060400002)(38730400002)(83716003)(6506006)(3280700002)(230783001)(99286003)(189998001)(6246003)(3846002)(6116002)(3660700001)(76176999)(54356999)(102836003)(33656002)(8936002)(81166006)(305945005)(25786009)(5660300001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:CY4PR06MB2456; H:CY4PR06MB2456.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:ovrnspm; PTR:InfoNoRecords; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Mar 2017 03:36:23.3540 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR06MB2456 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.40.45 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) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntp-chairs@ietf.org" , "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" > On Mar 28, 2017, at 9:57 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: > > On 3/28/17, Denis Reilly wrote: >> I can look for more stable URL's if sources like Wikipedia will cause a >> problem, so you can expect to see changes there, too. If anyone has >> particular suggestions for better citations, please contribute! > > I'll see what I can dig up and send suggested text changes. > >> I believe we've discussed the document's references to ntpd and ntp.conf >> before. I think it's more acceptable to reference implementation-specific >> things in a BCP than in any other IETF document -- lots of people in the >> community are using it, after all, and the document is a reflection of the >> current state of the community. Also, most of the submissions we've had so >> far are from people familiar with ntpd. We're happy to take submissions >> specific to other implementations if there are any practices that are >> worthwhile to share. > > My feelings on the ntp.conf references are more along the lines of > "this doesn't seem right" than "this is wrong". Karen/Dieter, might I > suggest requesting an early review from GEN-ART? For the record, I have requested an early GEN-ART review. Karen _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 23:19:18 2017 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 B9024126D85 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:19:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H96Zr7nwMAeq for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC14A12966D for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62AE686DC0A for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:19:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF37786DAE6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:19:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ct6wh-000H74-Uj for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:19:12 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 795605B266 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:19:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9371F5B16F for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:19:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:19:01 +0200 Message-Id: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:18:59 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: References: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" Yesterday's message had the wrong address in it: > Yesterday I wrote: >> > The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state >> > Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Karen O'Donoghue) >> > >> > The document is available at >> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds/ >> >> Hi! >> >> Actually I miss the purpose of the draft: Currently it seems to be >> just a copy from RFC 1305. Can anybody explain? >> >> Regards, >> Ulrich >> >> _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 28 23:27:09 2017 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 6FBFE1293E9 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:27:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AAMyvaKqf98K for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:27:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50047126D85 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:27:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A47586DC10 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:27:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 504C586DAE6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:27:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ct74J-000HKj-AQ for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:27:03 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 7CB3F5B2E9 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:26:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D4A65B2E6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:26:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:26:54 +0200 Message-Id: <58DB53AC020000A100025634@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:26:52 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: , References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org> In-Reply-To: <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Harlan Stenn schrieb am 29.03.2017 um 01:23 in Nachricht <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org>: > > On 3/28/2017 7:08 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: >> On 3/28/17, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>> IMHO it would be consistent to set precision to 3 (the lowest possible >>> precision (0.125s) where NTP will start to work) and use 29 bits of >>> randomness then. Still a half billion attack packets might transit without >>> being detected, but I doubt that. > > Ulrich, a precision of 3 is 8 seconds. Harlan, you are right, I missed the fact that a signed 24-bit number is used. I forgot about the fact that any real life clock using NTP could have a precision > 0. Of course I meant -3. Regards, Ulrich > >> 2**29 packets is about 541 gigabits including ethernet headers, so on >> a 1Gbps link is about a 0.18% chance of attacker success during the 1s >> MAXDIST window. On a 10Gbps link this becomes 1.8%. That's a big >> improvement over the status quo but still a non-negligible weakness. > > Daniel, you're continuing to focus on and assume that: > > - nobody will notice or care about these spoofs. The reference > implementation from NTF/ntp.org reports these on both the client and the > server side. > > - Once the client receives the response from the server, the origin > timestamp is zeroed in the client so no more responses from the server > will be accepted. > > This has all been said before, several times, and you continue to ignore > these points. > > Please take a breath of fresh air. > >> What's the benefit of randomizing anything less than the full 64 bits? > > For extranet communications, I'd likely choose 64 bits. But I'd also > consider this to be *my* policy choice. If somebody has good reason to > pick a different number, they should be able to. > > I would generally not choose information hiding or extra randomizing on > internal NTP traffic. > > -- > Harlan Stenn > http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mar 28 23:28:38 2017 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 5C11012966D for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:28:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5QphCvj76Ksl for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C0411293EC for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4BF86DC0E for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:28:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCF8486DAE6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:28:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.51]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ct75k-000HOU-Ol for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:28:32 +0000 Received: from rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id E49EF5B2E9 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:28:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta1.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCC975B2E6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:28:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:28:23 +0200 Message-Id: <58DB5405020000A100025639@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:28:21 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: , References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <58D9FD22020000A1000255AD@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <4cff4cd7-1eec-0e72-b235-1a8d65fc7fc4@nwtime.org> <58DA0F83020000A1000255CF@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org> In-Reply-To: <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.51 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 29.03.2017 um 08:26 in Nachricht <58DB53AC.69E : 161 : 60728>: >>>> Harlan Stenn schrieb am 29.03.2017 um 01:23 in Nachricht > <33dc07d7-9c3b-a261-91f0-4c32b7f076a9@nwtime.org>: > > > > > On 3/28/2017 7:08 AM, Daniel Franke wrote: > >> On 3/28/17, Ulrich Windl wrote: > >>> IMHO it would be consistent to set precision to 3 (the lowest possible > >>> precision (0.125s) where NTP will start to work) and use 29 bits of > >>> randomness then. Still a half billion attack packets might transit without > >>> being detected, but I doubt that. > > > > Ulrich, a precision of 3 is 8 seconds. > > Harlan, > > you are right, I missed the fact that a signed 24-bit number is used. I > forgot about the fact that any real life clock using NTP could have a > precision > 0. Of course I meant -3. Oops: (Still suffering from DST switch): 8 bit, not 24, of course. > > Regards, > Ulrich > > > > > >> 2**29 packets is about 541 gigabits including ethernet headers, so on > >> a 1Gbps link is about a 0.18% chance of attacker success during the 1s > >> MAXDIST window. On a 10Gbps link this becomes 1.8%. That's a big > >> improvement over the status quo but still a non-negligible weakness. > > > > Daniel, you're continuing to focus on and assume that: > > > > - nobody will notice or care about these spoofs. The reference > > implementation from NTF/ntp.org reports these on both the client and the > > server side. > > > > - Once the client receives the response from the server, the origin > > timestamp is zeroed in the client so no more responses from the server > > will be accepted. > > > > This has all been said before, several times, and you continue to ignore > > these points. > > > > Please take a breath of fresh air. > > > >> What's the benefit of randomizing anything less than the full 64 bits? > > > > For extranet communications, I'd likely choose 64 bits. But I'd also > > consider this to be *my* policy choice. If somebody has good reason to > > pick a different number, they should be able to. > > > > I would generally not choose information hiding or extra randomizing on > > internal NTP traffic. > > > > -- > > Harlan Stenn > > http://networktimefoundation.org - be a member! > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Mar 29 02:41:34 2017 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 EAC5E129418 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 02:41:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SpfLFUSRqhNJ for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 02:41:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B86F5129400 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 02:41:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E648D86DC0F for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:41:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E22A86DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:41:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctA6R-000Mpd-29 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:41:29 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E6322E6060; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:41:17 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 8E6322E6060 Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx05.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 8E6322E6060 Received: from localhost (holly.brq.redhat.com [10.34.24.121]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8E8896286; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:41:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:41:15 +0200 From: Miroslav Lichvar To: Daniel Franke Message-ID: <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.29]); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:41:17 +0000 (UTC) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.132.183.28 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mlichvar@redhat.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 04:50:42PM -0400, Daniel Franke wrote: > Regardless of your opinion of OpenNTPD design choices, the facts > remain that it's in wide deployment and sets the precision field to > zero. Those facts alone make it a good choice for standardization > since: > > 1. Matching an existing implementation leads to one less opportunity > for fingerprinting. I'm not sure how much that really helps. Even if other implementations sent packets looking exactly like those from openntpd, the timing of the packets would still be different. An observer can easily tell if it's openntpd, busybox (which is based on openntpd), ntpd, chrony, or something else, without actually looking at the values in the packets. The fixed one-second timer in ntpd not only helps with fingerprinting the implementation, it can be also very useful for fingerprinting individual ntpd instances as they send requests at the same sub-second fraction. A specification on how exactly should the timing for a given poll interval look like (e.g. its distribution and granularity) might help. However, adjustments of the polling interval that clients normally do to adapt to the stability of the clock and network could still be useful for fingerprinting. Suggesting a constant polling interval for all NTP clients on the Internet would probably not be a good idea. > 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it > won't break anything. 32 is not as common as 0, but it is used too. Another large precision that I often see is 118. I've no idea where that comes from. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 29 05:16:55 2017 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 E48411296C6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:16:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W_6NiweF27Ap for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08506129477 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D3C786DB51 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 12:16:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E0186DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 12:16:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from uillean.fuaim.com ([206.197.161.140]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctCWj-0005pa-Pp for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 12:16:47 +0000 Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1809888141 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:16:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from clemson.local (swifi-nat.jhuapl.edu [128.244.87.133]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D163280AE4 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 05:16:35 -0700 (PDT) To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> From: Brian Haberman Message-ID: <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:16:29 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 206.197.161.140 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: brian@innovationslab.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============1167124117859142573==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --===============1167124117859142573== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="hbNVeWJbQPRBJdXvC8miSGrVUraeS48wJ" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --hbNVeWJbQPRBJdXvC8miSGrVUraeS48wJ Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="TBvctht4qlVo97if9638h5KuQvqHLivIe"; protected-headers="v1" From: Brian Haberman To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Message-ID: <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net> Subject: Re: [ntpwg] The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" References: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> In-Reply-To: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> --TBvctht4qlVo97if9638h5KuQvqHLivIe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ulrich, On 3/29/17 2:18 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Yesterday's message had the wrong address in it: >=20 >> Yesterday I wrote: >>>> The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state >>>> Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Karen O'Donoghue) >>>> >>>> The document is available at >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds/=20 >>> >>> Hi! >>> >>> Actually I miss the purpose of the draft: Currently it seems to be >>> just a copy from RFC 1305. Can anybody explain? When RFC 5905 was published, it did not contain the mode 6 commands. Several people have complained about that, especially having to refer back to a now obsolete RFC 1305. The purpose of this draft is to provide an up-to-date reference for the mode 6 commands. One of the items I want to complete if the draft is adopted is to modernize the text and align it with RFC 5905. Regards, Brian --TBvctht4qlVo97if9638h5KuQvqHLivIe-- --hbNVeWJbQPRBJdXvC8miSGrVUraeS48wJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJY26WiAAoJEBOZRqCi7goqLpIIANbmLalcPEwr60uvzIbk4/p0 eZkoTfuxmwn2ZnegEuVQ5DkcWyj7oM5PepXUyZTFPna1JMnaBXnTmX8GmI/9AOSY SfjtV0vs8EY6OADD5Nj63yJOkvAKGI4sLzEL+NNWHWNdGCBWyErAe2tw4GUUnTIA CRMtuVgYjisUWXp/flJBaWG8ht7YrgVcgUqwUXmTGmruZFdCsPsMkQlfG28Ivscd mvcRQpWEObEoK64gy2E7Uxu7HPOSYgeeUed3buF+H9/jn9d13qdaRq02CLb63nOu Sd6Ycj44zbBEpQXQwC6lnDHHdOGNaLcMTSQ/weh3duR0trnpPiCyUnAhGOrp6qc= =7Aus -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --hbNVeWJbQPRBJdXvC8miSGrVUraeS48wJ-- --===============1167124117859142573== 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 --===============1167124117859142573==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 29 06:16:58 2017 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 3DD87129504 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:16:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nzuQhKT3RP89 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0534E1294EC for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72CBB86DC17 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:16:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 607AF86DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:16:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.52]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctDSt-0007OF-RF for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:16:52 +0000 Received: from rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 936237300D for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:16:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DEF572FFD for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:16:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:16:42 +0200 Message-Id: <58DBB3B8020000A100025649@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:16:40 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: , References: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net> In-Reply-To: <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.52 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Brian Haberman schrieb am 29.03.2017 um 14:16 in Nachricht <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net>: > Hi Ulrich, > > On 3/29/17 2:18 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> Yesterday's message had the wrong address in it: >> >>> Yesterday I wrote: >>>>> The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state >>>>> Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Karen O'Donoghue) >>>>> >>>>> The document is available at >>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds/ >>>> >>>> Hi! >>>> >>>> Actually I miss the purpose of the draft: Currently it seems to be >>>> just a copy from RFC 1305. Can anybody explain? > > When RFC 5905 was published, it did not contain the mode 6 commands. > Several people have complained about that, especially having to refer > back to a now obsolete RFC 1305. > > The purpose of this draft is to provide an up-to-date reference for the > mode 6 commands. I guessed so, but the document as it is now provides little new information, especially not on the fact that ntpdc's commands are mostly moved to mode 6. It would be nice to see them. >From one of my programs I've developed I can read tha tthe definition of the event codes changed (in an incompatible) between NTPv3 and v4. Similar for the peer event codes. Variable names also changed (some renamed, some dropped, some new). E.g.: "poll" vs. "tc". Another candidate is "state": First introduced in NTPv4, then dropped again. It's of little use when there is a command to read a variable (by name), when you don't know how the variable is named... > > One of the items I want to complete if the draft is adopted is to > modernize the text and align it with RFC 5905. Not to forget draft-odonoghue-ntpv4-control-02.txt... Regards, Ulrich > > Regards, > Brian _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 29 06:25:59 2017 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 7F5A11294EC for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:25:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i74OJFL9lh7u for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A955A126DD9 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:25:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6757686DC1B for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:25:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596F086DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:25:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f173.google.com ([209.85.220.173]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctDbd-0007i7-2k for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:25:54 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f173.google.com with SMTP id f11so12412476qkb.0 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:25:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zzSYCqEqSu4HZoP6z59HEFj7lzt0N3x/tM/1ngdt2kU=; b=CAGRuoSGHdaOrlMMvvy8zMfgiBC3QMLKETQXVEy4ZLCTJQriW/h+0X/31ldadZqAuU lRQmPErAWoQujonj692FqjJjVhcM4X7vQvkWNZI+UkiAgX3LWu5Qg6nxpT+1slYyWrYB NHlBfoZA/WYwyPZDLtW9zN1mt3+0o3C67hkHcaHjXVDFRNmm51JYzZdbtphAn3RyH86B eqdVgk6SiculeVFlmXdWvSw1kD104IuJeXXazRSk12ugn3Gj+fRVMvN7Y9fU/e3zAyUe ij2+K+NrR/uKA3wIbyIexOxo71icQuNY7xVgD9bOsrjSBF92a1+0FYSvj1cpK4HWBz7M jiQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zzSYCqEqSu4HZoP6z59HEFj7lzt0N3x/tM/1ngdt2kU=; b=LwwLfBsoq6QDleOv/NA1o6WvYOoHvQvTbELjAPM1reTKaraj3lq9WdXzjPnUvV4bIN a24HQPVmsLtYJMu/58w3AfDncmWE1WpA7ve0OQME/UUMI9yE3/9Jf4hVgnormAd40iE9 DjvU/2jXEN4OWRkPcm6Zp7h46jJXrGAsgG3c9zr4BETD1gA1pRBYpq46lC+z2QhJTB8b DOqZpU+uT2+IMzT3fU4nrWyZSwRWbd8aEzNXfourf5wc4N3XXSX7FN44OruXeRlh3Iel ZjyYaCbL1t8Ezu9osZ1m/ada9AnnooRvyfTxbJrJdvwadl+mCoeBosDf8dodAvlHOBVr wiGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1vWsxn4qVZAlopWi2nmX+1O1mB7H4+UZP4TvLqP9tLzF7UTAL/ZKusxPp29ML3t/3XOB2t9DAysDVRig== X-Received: by 10.55.26.160 with SMTP id l32mr501667qkh.10.1490793944348; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:25:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:25:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> From: Daniel Franke Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:25:43 -0400 Message-ID: To: Miroslav Lichvar X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.173 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/29/17, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > I'm not sure how much that really helps. Even if other implementations > sent packets looking exactly like those from openntpd, the timing of > the packets would still be different. An observer can easily tell if > it's openntpd, busybox (which is based on openntpd), ntpd, chrony, or > something else, without actually looking at the values in the packets. > > The fixed one-second timer in ntpd not only helps with fingerprinting > the implementation, it can be also very useful for fingerprinting > individual ntpd instances as they send requests at the same sub-second > fraction. > > A specification on how exactly should the timing for a given poll > interval look like (e.g. its distribution and granularity) might help. > However, adjustments of the polling interval that clients normally do > to adapt to the stability of the clock and network could still be > useful for fingerprinting. Suggesting a constant polling interval for > all NTP clients on the Internet would probably not be a good idea. So, you've raised two separate issues here. 1. Fingerprinting of individual clients based on the second-fraction they choose on startup. 2. Fingerprinting of implementations based on their scheduling algorithm. The first one is a serious but easy problem (just randomize the second-fraction each time). The second is minor but very difficult, because it's open-ended and any trivial change to implementation might lead to some tiny change in timing which could leak something. I think both of these issues should be out of scope for this document. This document is addressing interoperability issues by saying that certain field values in client packets which are contrary to what's specified by RFC 5905 are okay. But RFC 5905 is silent on nitty-gritty details of packet scheduling; there's nothing there to update. Is it worth it at all for the IETF to specify NTP packet scheduling? I'm inclined toward "no", but if somebody wants to change my mind on that then please start a new thread for it so that we don't derail this one any further. Anyway, you've at least convinced me that matching OpenNTPD isn't much of a reason to choose 0, since it's pretty unlikely that everybody else is also going to adopt currently whatever OpenNTPD uses for its scheduling algorithm. If there's some future cooperation to make scheduling algorithms match, then at that time the OpenNTPD guys can just switch their precision field to whatever we decide on. >> 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it >> won't break anything. > > 32 is not as common as 0, but it is used too. Another large precision > that I often see is 118. I've no idea where that comes from. Okay, if 32 is already in the wild then I guess I really don't care either way. So at last count we had two people -- Harlan and Miroslav -- who want 32. Does anybody still have an opinion in favor of 0, or can we switch to 32 and move on? _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 29 06:43:01 2017 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 6D11912953D for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:43:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GKfQMIjE_uoV for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A639129521 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:42:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C0986DC1B for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:42:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 801E486DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:42:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from uillean.fuaim.com ([206.197.161.140]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctDs4-00085o-7n for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:42:53 +0000 Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 842F98810A; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from clemson.local (swifi-nat.jhuapl.edu [128.244.87.133]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 387A83280AE4; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:42:43 -0700 (PDT) To: Ulrich Windl , ntpwg@lists.ntp.org References: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net> <58DBB3B8020000A100025649@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> From: Brian Haberman Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:42:36 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <58DBB3B8020000A100025649@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 206.197.161.140 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: brian@innovationslab.net X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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="===============0300343924701359717==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --===============0300343924701359717== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rQnRqvmejfojlpFF2LVqM3HsIUeiIAu4d" This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --rQnRqvmejfojlpFF2LVqM3HsIUeiIAu4d Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="um4UBlFJptUICruPMS4FN1O3ARvkInLgT"; protected-headers="v1" From: Brian Haberman To: Ulrich Windl , ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: Antw: Re: [ntpwg] The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in state "Call For Adoption By WG Issued" References: <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <58DB51D3020000A10002562B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net> <58DBB3B8020000A100025649@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> In-Reply-To: <58DBB3B8020000A100025649@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> --um4UBlFJptUICruPMS4FN1O3ARvkInLgT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ulrich, On 3/29/17 9:16 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>>> Brian Haberman schrieb am 29.03.2017 >>>> um 14:16 in > Nachricht <56ee9a97-6f65-bf71-0749-0596d3565a79@innovationslab.net>: >> Hi Ulrich, >>=20 >> On 3/29/17 2:18 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>> Yesterday's message had the wrong address in it: >>>=20 >>>> Yesterday I wrote: >>>>>> The NTP WG has placed draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds in >>>>>> state Call For Adoption By WG Issued (entered by Karen >>>>>> O'Donoghue) >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> The document is available at=20 >>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-haberman-ntpwg-mode-6-cmds/= >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Hi! >>>>>=20 >>>>> Actually I miss the purpose of the draft: Currently it seems >>>>> to be just a copy from RFC 1305. Can anybody explain? >>=20 >> When RFC 5905 was published, it did not contain the mode 6 >> commands. Several people have complained about that, especially >> having to refer back to a now obsolete RFC 1305. >>=20 >> The purpose of this draft is to provide an up-to-date reference for >> the mode 6 commands. >=20 > I guessed so, but the document as it is now provides little new > information, especially not on the fact that ntpdc's commands are > mostly moved to mode 6. It would be nice to see them. So, you would also like to see the mode 7 commands in this draft? Seems reasonable on first thought. I queried folks for any new mode 6 commands, but received no responses. That is why there is no real new content between this draft and 1305. >=20 >> From one of my programs I've developed I can read tha tthe >> definition of the event codes changed (in an incompatible) between >> NTPv3 and v4. Similar for the peer event codes. Variable names also >> changed (some renamed, some dropped, some new). E.g.: "poll" vs. >> "tc". Another candidate is "state": First introduced in NTPv4, then >> dropped again. >=20 > It's of little use when there is a command to read a variable (by > name), when you don't know how the variable is named... >=20 Are you saying that there needs to be a renaming effort within this draft to align names with 5905? >>=20 >> One of the items I want to complete if the draft is adopted is to=20 >> modernize the text and align it with RFC 5905. >=20 > Not to forget draft-odonoghue-ntpv4-control-02.txt... Yes. That was a previous attempt to bring the mode 6 information up to da= te. Regards, Brian --um4UBlFJptUICruPMS4FN1O3ARvkInLgT-- --rQnRqvmejfojlpFF2LVqM3HsIUeiIAu4d Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJY27nRAAoJEBOZRqCi7goqK8oH/RPdBO6KtTHcA6zG1aj3Aj8G KJAdT2GNBsBGYfo8LmOC71w+d14Fo/tyJObRSWrnJ6LZ8bj9uy9XyZQmso1iW1e4 pMwVmoP+Wq2GQjsb5ByBHrrAyLvHQulEwbl+GRnHKedicS8c3NYR9/DC2KDi94xA /Pdt8tZFPmRVORee08kC1sbICme7DM3QcTtzff1vQfeLer7/lRDFuQYblSPssSdU wKH15q7eHBu3ncs780KT7imRlGgVGSBL5kw5A2NAZxN8DUsAZx4GEVY4BCGFPdGy zklgYN1977onnlieNAXAp9GovWpreAoWmMWcygiXvkzZckTZL/f3WJY/f+IMVlo= =eeS/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rQnRqvmejfojlpFF2LVqM3HsIUeiIAu4d-- --===============0300343924701359717== 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 --===============0300343924701359717==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 29 07:02:49 2017 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 D692012953D for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:02:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.791 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=oroliagroup.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iK2fAXhZbHNW for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:02:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D150812951B for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 07:02:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE0F86DC19 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:02:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9801286DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:02:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-db5eur01on0088.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.2.88] helo=EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctEBH-0008fS-G1 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:02:43 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=OROLIAGROUP.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-spectracom-orolia-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=EEVb+K2WNgpbYclB/Zy9ONizTcQORl9qYq6KM4adAS0=; b=RCJd4povF0Fo64I5jtcNU7Q1ffxa6qIOhZBOpI6EPmIJxVlNOy9P9j7U/B8mAsuM9dbUar4IU5GCYvmz83m4hsJH4LesZx/8okIB/eh5+hIrXxTbG5LNDfwhlcSCrMv4KnkZvLpl+zGcDZYV64yFXvU9pCJLj72rT90z5dICoT8= Received: from AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.60.28) by AM3PR06MB1204.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.163.60.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.991.14; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:02:31 +0000 Received: from AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1863:750a:d1c4:ba10]) by AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1863:750a:d1c4:ba10%14]) with mapi id 15.01.0991.020; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:02:31 +0000 From: Denis Reilly To: Daniel Franke Thread-Topic: Repo for ntp-bcp change tracking? Thread-Index: AQHSqBIOj9VZrE25kEG99xs/QAb7PKGr2K6w Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:02:31 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=spectracom.orolia.com; x-originating-ip: [66.193.84.98] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; AM3PR06MB1204; 7:IDfwe1SAFziWOkzVSaenqTSk5H76XLQyni5Zw+4ILCoPFgCmZDzmtvVSWTqcjRowybbtBAZ59jygh7tIaCX0PXOBDQEITBX4B3TLlDOdyCDogWd/TNAix0i61Hx+J5UqgBPyM6lhGA9Q2Aym/wIDNP7QazcrRs01Spv5JBFDx6f5sFPqjF5caa1rxTKXGRKpwXWcHKPLip/SU//luDRjX/wUdn9L8CFKtTLo2Q8D3ABc48oMOx3BRS2sgr4basStZBe8HjiLoPS/wy+aWZMnoh4eK9AQ4AdW6g620hTkYHObRpSxQT7ALmP2t0XFDGSSNB3JakpQ8LMp2jaszsoQ/A== x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9fe8af89-fe43-4aa3-5c53-08d476ac3e13 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423075)(201703031133081); SRVR:AM3PR06MB1204; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(166708455590820); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6041248)(20161123564025)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(201703061406075)(20161123558025)(20161123555025)(6072148); SRVR:AM3PR06MB1204; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:AM3PR06MB1204; x-forefront-prvs: 0261CCEEDF x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(979002)(6009001)(39850400002)(39410400002)(39400400002)(39450400003)(39840400002)(13464003)(377454003)(6246003)(6116002)(53936002)(3846002)(102836003)(3280700002)(189998001)(53546009)(2906002)(25786009)(110136004)(39060400002)(4326008)(6436002)(8936002)(38730400002)(3660700001)(8676002)(33656002)(6506006)(81166006)(6306002)(99286003)(55016002)(9686003)(7696004)(54356999)(1411001)(76176999)(6916009)(305945005)(2950100002)(42882006)(50986999)(2900100001)(7736002)(229853002)(74316002)(66066001)(5660300001)(86362001)(5250100002)(969003)(989001)(999001)(1009001)(1019001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AM3PR06MB1204; H:AM3PR06MB1202.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:ovrnspm; PTR:InfoNoRecords; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: spectracom.orolia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Mar 2017 14:02:31.1489 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a263030c-9c1b-421f-9471-1dec0b29c664 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM3PR06MB1204 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.2.88 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: denis.reilly@spectracom.orolia.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Repo for ntp-bcp change tracking? X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" https://github.com/denisreilly/ntp-bcp I have the different versions there, after forking you should edit draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-03.xml (which will be the next version). -- Denis Reilly | Lead Engineer | dreilly@spectracom.com (585)321-5837 This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you received this e-mail in error please note that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Franke [mailto:dfoxfranke@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 6:24 PM To: Denis Reilly Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Repo for ntp-bcp change tracking? Denis, I have a bunch of editorial changes to propose for draft-ietf-ntp-bcp. It'll be a lot easier for both of us if I track them in git. Do you already have a GitHub repo somewhere that I fork from? If not I'll just create one from the current draft. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 29 08:38:06 2017 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 9F504129735 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:38:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.79 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.79 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAD_ENC_HEADER=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=mscc365.onmicrosoft.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dQSVQiR_irnh for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAE7A1296DF for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BCEF86DC0E for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:38:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20B8B86DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:37:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-dm3nam03on0049.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([104.47.41.49] helo=NAM03-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctFfP-000B1b-P1 for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:37:56 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mscc365.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-microsemi-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=QrArvax7hhh7cB8RDkqq3Ah/6G6Mlq9czEiBNTz/Tf4=; b=ibQVBzcXuWaJSA38rH2gXy2HE/xrxlARdxvKcHwkkBCBjpLNKFWFaSh3zY2bQ6QdNUb5QHWF3fMgbc6/BcoeZXLC/L4S9UAnKe7WGpCZw/0Bf5kA2WLwZLLjlUQKi1HTNpVclagKJq0KuxvjvgUs68DVjvY+srLhTVqV/Jq4/CU= Received: from BY2PR02CA0093.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.242.32.51) by BN1PR02MB102.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.242.211.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1005.10; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:37:45 +0000 Received: from BN1BFFO11FD001.protection.gbl (2a01:111:f400:7c10::1:189) by BY2PR02CA0093.outlook.office365.com (2a01:111:e400:2c2a::51) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.888.16 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:37:45 +0000 Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is 208.19.100.20) smtp.mailfrom=microsemi.com; lists.ntp.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;lists.ntp.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=microsemi.com; Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: microsemi.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) Received: from avsrvexchhts2.microsemi.net (208.19.100.20) by BN1BFFO11FD001.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.58.144.64) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA_P384) id 15.1.977.7 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:37:44 +0000 Received: from SJSRVEXCHHTS1.microsemi.net (10.241.34.105) by avsrvexchhts2.microsemi.net (10.100.34.106) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.339.0; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:37:18 -0700 Received: from SJSRVEXCHMBX2.microsemi.net ([fe80::6da0:6f9d:d5d1:3d5d]) by sjsrvexchhts1.microsemi.net ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0339.000; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:37:19 -0700 From: Greg Dowd To: Miroslav Lichvar , Daniel Franke Thread-Topic: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) Thread-Index: AQHSpns4+7sbKLi2SUq/3VU0hMMlk6GpJ0cAgAAJvgCAABbrgIAAA70AgAAFe4CAAElQgIAABYIAgAJpn4D//+4BQA== Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:37:18 +0000 Message-ID: <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.241.128.48] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-MS-Office365-Filtering-HT: Tenant X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:208.19.100.20; IPV:NLI; CTRY:US; EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(39400400002)(39410400002)(39860400002)(39850400002)(39840400002)(39450400003)(2980300002)(428002)(377454003)(24454002)(189002)(13464003)(199003)(9170700003)(50466002)(5250100002)(71926001)(356003)(7696004)(229853002)(38730400002)(47776003)(33656002)(106466001)(46406003)(23726003)(189998001)(97756001)(5890100001)(55846006)(5660300001)(6116002)(3846002)(102836003)(86362001)(105586002)(8746002)(81166006)(50986999)(8676002)(54356999)(76176999)(305945005)(2920100001)(49446005)(53416004)(8936002)(6246003)(2900100001)(7736002)(2906002)(53936002)(53546009)(4326008)(2950100002)(966004)(101416001)(9686003)(6306002)(69596002)(39060400002)(1720100001)(230783001)(93886004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BN1PR02MB102; H:avsrvexchhts2.microsemi.net; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:ovrnspm; MX:1; A:1; PTR:InfoDomainNonexistent; LANG:en; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BN1BFFO11FD001; 1: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 X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 0114ef30-118d-4fe2-e974-08d476b98bbe X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075)(201703131423075)(201703031133081); SRVR:BN1PR02MB102; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BN1PR02MB102; 3:7QkzzXcbcvubiKeLw691jDOxyS9P9wohTuBPcepaGzoxa2NT4T40UHCl951XoRxcIOqRp0yQCARuF6xryxIoZrkA+7t+A3Oh40Z5IdbxMmUOkw0T9Jv18ejNLetGDD/r8XgzYmXywUzRWqu73UotGtiswOWiM2Rtu3epLW356VjXcdTNVErTLr0e3nMjGx6ysAe8rPfutTZ16aF/hFJUSJo4LL9sseAxX/kxyNT2u4wlCS/zVt3tI/OAF3uEgLgzPGOE+WdVSdRQOM9BEJxwRONvyVt2YUprcBYC+AMa5EZE4fAn0ca6nYMuIa4EsXtfWpoArWqnxThOyXWqO4Uum3nvxGHrdC5/uukV5KIRhZoPhiPoABMLQemYiMvx3D9XJIcu1uhNJvRuZBeaxms95EPuv1NJeJuFGPn7hJwo9+KqbzNYeP/BNDB5PUIYe7V83ABUUeTMS92F5u6wyS6oMA==; 25:c2Qq0Y68OXISm5iIAQBwMzTwBXScR6ZVEreLY3Q/e5Oo5bwIMjbjzB8QYcoOis/lNCaI/+bWEWYfZ11cB+p72s19NKrd96z2DQpHmQ2gaQSOOqwTZeXY+is4l7zGlbbiRHIYHJsY9Bs7sX74IGnauQG9R18U7ORocl7cMsuR5L5ZLmyqK03Gnd/4dw9cjqCtfeGskxQISE2r9KpFMpX1eLhjX2phFUuaaEa209iykDEmSpnXuFnLz3daNziXdBmoafV5QS1fwDUwxPal9NMxoM2qp8L2OECuy5PuZZJRUjoNxuU6EKggIcyS1nLQm7NJ24qNtvhSUV9ZnGgAqa/N6T9dMyAffdflCOxtyjwfDWdntcjvf7TJJ0TrAUJel5kk73/+tcBAYWxh+AIjvmCVk7HLo8y5SOo1QQ7+JmG83dAIbddMg53oTZ2OsoTiTFzLSiqxdiWAh28GmbEMTFAMDA== X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BN1PR02MB102; 31:GaXRwPAfxz9K0iIIj/yXcf4cAbXqRIxjJTEuiHKQG7S2q+gfGyv2vhMmpHf/1t4a3juWETCAJQz4sGsMxq7KwTFSYCvyaagc9vST3R9BgEshkA2KDXGpSBtakSn7skrY+hXBxgMyBrH7ABMZSYQmIOk1dBQGFhw+cazM+vzt8FqltpIaY/wm9zHRGTbDu6k+LUN/sP83waFiwVW7P6YgY5dDxkI9IIIQ16FCcSO8s+X/9oLqGUNkBO0UGFMW44rosmVy9U5U9pcpSIt5QbDXCQ==; 20: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 X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(13018025)(13024025)(13016025)(8121501046)(5005006)(13023025)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041248)(20161123560025)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(201703061406075)(20161123562025)(20161123555025)(20161123558025)(20161123564025)(6072148); SRVR:BN1PR02MB102; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BN1PR02MB102; X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BN1PR02MB102; 4: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 X-Forefront-PRVS: 0261CCEEDF X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: =?us-ascii?Q?1; BN1PR02MB102; 23:vlRgHvh/Xotoxjx4yv3X10zAVuuKE2HtzBMXneTvRI?= =?us-ascii?Q?CR1XRpE6N+n+G6W5NJQnZ4cPJVJ6+j/A0IL3JzP/Tz+Q/Y/xPB3XK93NREUt?= =?us-ascii?Q?S+ZPSH1db9S2U6CfWH3JxKYusgKliir+SBnFcvwOUfc1F/A1lGwpecQuGQSn?= =?us-ascii?Q?mAkaOdH3Ne/HlhguMARbur+6vXZlwzooNI8Qe/5xtVV2y4rcOisY+4Ri3qrP?= =?us-ascii?Q?xvC+qNqA9TTRiVs0sRIfZByAWElVT7q288fCHxHIbtIIt5yCwhAXmvAHFy5U?= =?us-ascii?Q?TUm9tWmUhderD0Of/wZo5jzxl0nkOG5rU+g+4TcmhLbmS/gcFohgEwm3deWI?= =?us-ascii?Q?ShHw8ibr+K4wPtmRyiHsvKril1iy1vtIqLBuLRR9oU4bV8AVREsMyQxtVyWE?= =?us-ascii?Q?ykbjqdH7DDLTmdhvmMbGygFhyy1LN8XHH9Fbyr5vWUYCS26UQrHRiTApJBvA?= =?us-ascii?Q?RBa4V4AUTrXX8VbYd4Bj+Z+vHJ8Cfz3vm+Igm8oA/29hpscyOibhgPSihOFw?= =?us-ascii?Q?g9LiDfW7al2bLBTlxtCNqRNo/Ek+xI7p76hQwMt1fUTUNycg9nCIq0LOICt/?= =?us-ascii?Q?3x0RC3FFeZCNTIZc33yo79R0vw5Pt6U4sJXgvdg7FdkkpQK2H/uHDKvotWoB?= =?us-ascii?Q?KtCgUYeFZ0L9F3YOyiq/lQSMbYAIqjYggvDo0NzlpV1Zp42NxXE2kyvtLtTG?= =?us-ascii?Q?R3DRfV9cUNlAZgMIfsppN2OODlM9ppZkJPuztU9qprhEDOYyRx/JYLnZuMIM?= =?us-ascii?Q?syoxarv9BV2//F6DesnXj1Wqo+Fmrm5Iux5W+zFb/f6PwL8Taa4iNJoHLlS4?= =?us-ascii?Q?4tPTARY5+HXuAjZw/2kCGD3YdNdgPQzTDk3pZyIOSfalfQ/xQenastVS5VwL?= =?us-ascii?Q?Z0FEx+ZPwqau2d8EGroIJmeoP1zv65QKiBAGaoMSjwJbiO5pwxjC46aJDpEG?= =?us-ascii?Q?uOUxwWU8BCYcb7R5vv1yzWrBxR6pzVqFsL+f7WLDzHDuQ2GhDjJl/ask7Vat?= =?us-ascii?Q?21S4GTJN+15iDwm8FYh2/6YLhBgPxp19UH4MmLi8cxUcYopNIJIUZXy5GcBi?= =?us-ascii?Q?KavbWuaDjlMpcVbPYfziXTZyzax+9rImLylHBNDTe9UVEOZMoUv87YeSXYcT?= =?us-ascii?Q?XRE+soo91tixbVy/XPTNfmTvvhnuMjXDv6OylLfk3i7ALoB0MLneDkglTVTw?= =?us-ascii?Q?LarrbnMlzLtJxdN0YSN1wnY8rxmIDT8hpy19VBHDsVQNpOAepvwUr68GTwIJ?= =?us-ascii?Q?35W+eocKfQpNnqvIMhSS6ouCAxjZIQCk8EOG1W0V64L28fTh7LC+GyWHpzCt?= =?us-ascii?Q?C82ENW77TDClDKpjVNf9dYB2maLJAiO6dq+ocm/LVypHTHytVGq5NM+55xeS?= =?us-ascii?Q?/VW31BKP60SVjyCNKkPzeMFQPitvf62VZHOT/4eEqyoyJPVyanNREXEauM9N?= =?us-ascii?Q?pNu3gweeuXv7muBSQ7d9raFEPRrDzDoTXfEM7lP7XZFvfYd6y3Z175AmyamP?= =?us-ascii?Q?89BQGUhNIXNdfJ/GvV8J/K/mRf8v7OfSKJBVGK7Oj85x90cSZqalXR8TJ8rc?= =?us-ascii?Q?qoCcdTh6b4qogxjg=3D=3D?= X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BN1PR02MB102; 6:lj2PpIPlgFRRD1lUaQRpuWsqJBHVyRhoHtrimz701lsW0+rG7ESXCOElSBRdzAJefphZ4BNCYyTaslfHU8myRmU/OAtgEjweijdfCL9F18fiXW5SE7NeAqSFywTx9RweotGq/GjXc/4FkUZiZVo9rcyssJUPybv/mTTMtZtRJPlHYDSABDCN7l33qduvjtZ5gD4Pfu2KdEClvhr+7dh9NTLavaxfCsPYrjU3T1vk292uXZ7LKCYeyGvXNyQ4CwJW9FsqE/H/ath0nKN77+2kpftXNsHqdUnHEQf/qL1dL8fTOlQBzNhwlWFasqYKwgVFS7hcgVtEKJt7pjS6zshKMr/u7z4cBkRXlin4Jzc4BzifFbiScLbKqRkMAM40BYA3UX5e4JczmN+AYGSqQQSKO8eP2KnbA8c8And5Ztk8VBw=; 5:x/mFkS4TQ7sS/2HJ3qsMoobXiJ5EJAeD+ygtmWfOGv0O7DxtQ4FOV7rOMegf8EsTS5TMYiV9VLXeYPELXcdQ1DPu03SgfTEFa1xhsIRuG2Ho0QMlegpAwF1dnPNkaZfY7nrtW4aOi7yFak/DVS+ELg==; 24:QLOfknO0zv/q93v4gRBVwhMs9wgi498PT6qrmosNEBOn4fIZLmgrW/zTH51IbblINLWB6Acxd8wIRQrOA6ip2l2FjthB4721e1wp/5rRFbU= SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99 SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1; BN1PR02MB102; 7:+ZD6I+H4h5I5hApWBmc0E44VlxZcXHpGSQxJ/PiEKSJC1xIt18V40iWQmlngzJ9cNrQkn4uMlN7msmvRBMK+Jx8WNZ2zegxlBbi5HUxsIKjDCLyK/Jq+5rDVoldPz0rhy85+gdmM5qGkzFO8MzjGcmZLl5Qq3AVe7yJKfyT8Mc++sbCRy6JBn+znASU/zyYkUfzyg6VzACjpfJfl0zO05gOQxrJ4ZP+ocyBXXGlRbzYIGPM1jTwDmAJLXRLXi/RdS0OmS+T5LpsM/xS7VowgR/C7gWvk5asK/MSnm43uJ6WWssVNwGpR2LgUl19kQlnyi4secj+no0MhYPDRBDQ69Q== X-OriginatorOrg: microsemi.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Mar 2017 15:37:44.8378 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: f267a5c8-86d8-4cc9-af71-1fd2c67c8fad X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=f267a5c8-86d8-4cc9-af71-1fd2c67c8fad; Ip=[208.19.100.20]; Helo=[avsrvexchhts2.microsemi.net] X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN1PR02MB102 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 104.47.41.49 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Greg.Dowd@microsemi.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" IIRC, there is a randomizer of a second or two attached to the calculation of the next poll in ntpd? -----Original Message----- From: ntpwg [mailto:ntpwg-bounces+gdowd=symmetricom.com@lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of Miroslav Lichvar Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 2:41 AM To: Daniel Franke Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) EXTERNAL EMAIL On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 04:50:42PM -0400, Daniel Franke wrote: > Regardless of your opinion of OpenNTPD design choices, the facts > remain that it's in wide deployment and sets the precision field to > zero. Those facts alone make it a good choice for standardization > since: > > 1. Matching an existing implementation leads to one less opportunity > for fingerprinting. I'm not sure how much that really helps. Even if other implementations sent packets looking exactly like those from openntpd, the timing of the packets would still be different. An observer can easily tell if it's openntpd, busybox (which is based on openntpd), ntpd, chrony, or something else, without actually looking at the values in the packets. The fixed one-second timer in ntpd not only helps with fingerprinting the implementation, it can be also very useful for fingerprinting individual ntpd instances as they send requests at the same sub-second fraction. A specification on how exactly should the timing for a given poll interval look like (e.g. its distribution and granularity) might help. However, adjustments of the polling interval that clients normally do to adapt to the stability of the clock and network could still be useful for fingerprinting. Suggesting a constant polling interval for all NTP clients on the Internet would probably not be a good idea. > 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it > won't break anything. 32 is not as common as 0, but it is used too. Another large precision that I often see is 118. I've no idea where that comes from. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 29 08:48:12 2017 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 CCC0812984A for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:48:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.092 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.197, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SyU36r5eGm5U for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:48:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FC8D129562 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:48:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D05BB86DC1E for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:48:10 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6355986DAE6 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:48:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f178.google.com ([209.85.220.178]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctFpH-000BHm-DN for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:48:07 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-f178.google.com with SMTP id f11so16501473qkb.0 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:47:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gT3cDwS9JbIfkcImlypoIlN9rx0FBRt9rJ8GIDEpioU=; b=MGNYgoDV5sUha0D9ONU8f2FMdxMuUpp2huY+uYHvKDEPWgfvfRYzMj+QinGSIJEZcj 03TlWLn10+XrUoFqRrduPF7W1+xwz9rthkVb7zijBZoinzGaOgZfbpobq5qoFI8GfbrA Rkjnf1zxUSWaxUARUEfY+vxI24nZUYkgXqrZwbBhiFoNvkncDLQx8tIeJTO00fRGQ5YA Kp/6tNB1fwtI3BHh5Jnmk56r0PEWPQBxfBNrHPv9HerfE8xD6Vvfhxl0HWHNThMnY554 uls+x3nPbctptVxzf4CmJr3ByR0YSN6d1aqzf/wSatp4vzMnLbgx5xIAH36WDAgjcPo5 lcwg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gT3cDwS9JbIfkcImlypoIlN9rx0FBRt9rJ8GIDEpioU=; b=NJWeuXS01V7ZpQFPVaho5/Srnj3BYyjoVeOkq7RfEB/JekwTO5ddBTlLlVKZjiZGCN xDDy0IVdreDvP4LowvUHTWrJVyoGv4jKzSmqLifcPwlvmPTFyy9IDatADW8ggKqQ2xQI Cj7MqYhuCvyUlRpP9KgcwJnJHInNAibgK6U5esF++XgfuRsqBqQaMw4lBwpUlq2vte90 cDoyqLookD0ccpECQ/i6IckNaWIss7jJ8vq91mlpi+epn0jZ75EaArvHX0kylCGNI1Cd 7MXMhileOsovpMRwEA283cF8ZmoVgDC5JK7ZLg9/h9N5C0CTuqFVclq78eBb2vywkKUN mV9w== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1T7bZxUxdrOvIJ+QE7TeoT8GpVSLK5pP/hNxbP2Q8pGxUhKGJVi68uQVJcJSwrvyCWb8wvzWJxNgUn0g== X-Received: by 10.55.5.136 with SMTP id 130mr1274505qkf.279.1490802478815; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:47:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.136.119 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:47:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net> References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net> From: Daniel Franke Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:47:58 -0400 Message-ID: To: Greg Dowd X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.85.220.178 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dfoxfranke@gmail.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On 3/29/17, Greg Dowd wrote: > IIRC, there is a randomizer of a second or two attached to the calculation > of the next poll in ntpd? IIRC you're correct, but the randomization is some number of whole seconds. The fractional part of the second is determined by whenever the SIGALRM happens to come in, which is not random. Anyhow, I think this is clearly out-of-scope for the IETF and should be taken to NTP implementations' respective development lists. _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 29 11:50:45 2017 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 ECC17129476 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:50:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.472 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.472 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_MOSTLY=0.428, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wCHOJd-NVPeR for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CD1B129525 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:50:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E7B386DC24 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 18:50:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19F7186DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 18:50:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.bs.ptb.de ([192.53.103.120]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctIfo-000Fsj-Dv for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 18:50:34 +0000 Received: from smtp-hub.bs.ptb.de (smtpint01.bs.ptb.de [141.25.87.32]) by mx1.bs.ptb.de with ESMTP id v2TIoM7l001515-v2TIoM7n001515 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 20:50:22 +0200 Received: from rose.bs.ptb.de (rose.bs.ptb.de [141.25.85.201]) by smtp-hub.bs.ptb.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B9763064AC; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 20:50:22 +0200 (CEST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: References: , <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> From: dieter.sibold@ptb.de To: Daniel Franke Message-ID: Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 20:50:20 +0200 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.53.103.120 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dieter.sibold@ptb.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5900083708067600122==" Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" --===============5900083708067600122== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 00677C33C12580F2_=" --=_alternative 00677C33C12580F2_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -----"ntpwg" wrote: --= --- >To: Miroslav Lichvar >From: Daniel Franke=20 >Sent by: "ntpwg"=20 >Date: 03/29/2017 15:26 >Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org >Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption >(draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) > >On 3/29/17, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: >> I'm not sure how much that really helps. Even if other >implementations >> sent packets looking exactly like those from openntpd, the timing >of >> the packets would still be different. An observer can easily tell >if >> it's openntpd, busybox (which is based on openntpd), ntpd, chrony, >or >> something else, without actually looking at the values in the >packets. >> >> The fixed one-second timer in ntpd not only helps with >fingerprinting >> the implementation, it can be also very useful for fingerprinting >> individual ntpd instances as they send requests at the same >sub-second >> fraction. >> >> A specification on how exactly should the timing for a given poll >> interval look like (e.g. its distribution and granularity) might >help. >> However, adjustments of the polling interval that clients normally >do >> to adapt to the stability of the clock and network could still be >> useful for fingerprinting. Suggesting a constant polling interval >for >> all NTP clients on the Internet would probably not be a good idea. > >So, you've raised two separate issues here. > >1. Fingerprinting of individual clients based on the second-fraction >they choose on startup. >2. Fingerprinting of implementations based on their scheduling >algorithm. > >The first one is a serious but easy problem (just randomize the >second-fraction each time). The second is minor but very difficult, >because it's open-ended and any trivial change to implementation >might >lead to some tiny change in timing which could leak something. > >I think both of these issues should be out of scope for this >document. >This document is addressing interoperability issues by saying that >certain field values in client packets which are contrary to what's >specified by RFC 5905 are okay. But RFC 5905 is silent on >nitty-gritty >details of packet scheduling; there's nothing there to update. > >Is it worth it at all for the IETF to specify NTP packet scheduling? >I'm inclined toward "no", but if somebody wants to change my mind on >that then please start a new thread for it so that we don't derail >this one any further. > >Anyway, you've at least convinced me that matching OpenNTPD isn't >much >of a reason to choose 0, since it's pretty unlikely that everybody >else is also going to adopt currently whatever OpenNTPD uses for its >scheduling algorithm. If there's some future cooperation to make >scheduling algorithms match, then at that time the OpenNTPD guys can >just switch their precision field to whatever we decide on. > >>> 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident >it >>> won't break anything. >> >> 32 is not as common as 0, but it is used too. Another large >precision >> that I often see is 118. I've no idea where that comes from. > >Okay, if 32 is already in the wild then I guess I really don't care >either way. So at last count we had two people -- Harlan and Miroslav >-- who want 32. Does anybody still have an opinion in favor of 0, or >can we switch to 32 and move on? I support to use 32. >=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F >ntpwg mailing list >ntpwg@lists.ntp.org >http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg > --=_alternative 00677C33C12580F2_= Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-ID: <> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

-----"nt= pwg" <ntpwg-bounces+dieter.sibold=3Dptb.de@lists.ntp.org> wrote: ----= -

>T= o: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
>From: Daniel Franke
>Sent by: "ntp= wg"
>Date: 03/29/2017 15:26
>Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
= >Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption
&g= t;(draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization)
><= br>
>On 3/29/17, Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar= @redhat.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure = how much that really helps. Even if other
>= ;implementations
>> sent packets lookin= g exactly like those from openntpd, the timing
>> the packets would still be = different. An observer can easily tell
>if=
>> it's openntpd, busybox (which is ba= sed on openntpd), ntpd, chrony,
>or
>> something else, without actually looking a= t the values in the
>packets.
>>
>> The fixed= one-second timer in ntpd not only helps with
>fingerprinting
>> the implementati= on, it can be also very useful for fingerprinting
>> individual ntpd instances as they send requests at the same
>sub-second
&= gt;> fraction.
>>
>> A specification on how exactly should the timing for a= given poll
>> interval look like (e.g.= its distribution and granularity) might
>= help.
>> However, adjustments of the po= lling interval that clients normally
>do
>> to adapt to the stability of the cloc= k and network could still be
>> useful = for fingerprinting. Suggesting a constant polling interval
>for
>> all NTP client= s on the Internet would probably not be a good idea.
>
>So, you've raised two separa= te issues here.
>
>1. Fingerprinting of individual clients based on the second-fract= ion
>they choose on startup.
>2. Fingerprinting of implementations based on their sc= heduling
>algorithm.
>
>The first one is a seriou= s but easy problem (just randomize the
>se= cond-fraction each time). The second is minor but very difficult,
=
>because it's open-ended and any trivial change to = implementation
>might
>lead to some tiny change in timing which could leak somethin= g.
>
>I t= hink both of these issues should be out of scope for this
>document.
>This document = is addressing interoperability issues by saying that
>certain field values in client packets which are contrary to wh= at's
>specified by RFC 5905 are okay. But = RFC 5905 is silent on
>nitty-gritty
>details of packet scheduling; there's nothing t= here to update.
>
>Is it worth it at all for the IETF to specify NTP packet scheduli= ng?
>I'm inclined toward "no", but if some= body wants to change my mind on
>that then= please start a new thread for it so that we don't derail
>this one any further.
>
>Anyw= ay, you've at least convinced me that matching OpenNTPD isn't
>much
>of a reason to = choose 0, since it's pretty unlikely that everybody
>else is also going to adopt currently whatever OpenNTPD uses for= its
>scheduling algorithm. If there's som= e future cooperation to make
>scheduling a= lgorithms match, then at that time the OpenNTPD guys can
>just switch their precision field to whatever we decide on.=
>
>>&= gt; 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident
<= /div>
>it
>>>= won't break anything.
>>
>> 32 is not as common as 0, but it is used too. Ano= ther large
>precision
>> that I often see is 118. I've no idea where that comes = from.
>
>= Okay, if 32 is already in the wild then I guess I really don't care
>either way. So at last count we had two people -= - Harlan and Miroslav
>-- who want 32. Doe= s anybody still have an opinion in favor of 0, or
>can we switch to 32 and move on?
I support to use 32.
=
>=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F
>ntpwg mailing= list
>ntpwg@lists.ntp.org
>http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/ntpwg
>
 --=_alternative 00677C33C12580F2_=-- --===============5900083708067600122== 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 --===============5900083708067600122==-- From ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Wed Mar 29 23:03:00 2017 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 D58001204DA for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:03:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9I4tgD8zC5VG for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:02:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4F97127058 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:02:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11ED086DBC1 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 06:02:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9DB386DAB3 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 06:02:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.52]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctTAS-0006tO-9X for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 06:02:52 +0000 Received: from rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id C96E6730B0 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:02:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72CD473069 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:02:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:02:42 +0200 Message-Id: <58DC9F80020000A100025667@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:02:40 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net> In-Reply-To: <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.52 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Greg Dowd schrieb am 29.03.2017 um 17:37 in Nachricht <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net>: > IIRC, there is a randomizer of a second or two attached to the calculation of > the next poll in ntpd? Actually I think this isn't needed considering the fact that today's timers all have sub-second resolution. So it would be enough to distribute the polls within aone second. Regards, Ulrich > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ntpwg [mailto:ntpwg-bounces+gdowd=symmetricom.com@lists.ntp.org] On > Behalf Of Miroslav Lichvar > Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 2:41 AM > To: Daniel Franke > Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org > Subject: Re: [ntpwg] call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) > > EXTERNAL EMAIL > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 04:50:42PM -0400, Daniel Franke wrote: >> Regardless of your opinion of OpenNTPD design choices, the facts >> remain that it's in wide deployment and sets the precision field to >> zero. Those facts alone make it a good choice for standardization >> since: >> >> 1. Matching an existing implementation leads to one less opportunity >> for fingerprinting. > > I'm not sure how much that really helps. Even if other implementations sent > packets looking exactly like those from openntpd, the timing of the packets > would still be different. An observer can easily tell if it's openntpd, > busybox (which is based on openntpd), ntpd, chrony, or something else, > without actually looking at the values in the packets. > > The fixed one-second timer in ntpd not only helps with fingerprinting the > implementation, it can be also very useful for fingerprinting individual ntpd > instances as they send requests at the same sub-second fraction. > > A specification on how exactly should the timing for a given poll interval > look like (e.g. its distribution and granularity) might help. > However, adjustments of the polling interval that clients normally do to > adapt to the stability of the clock and network could still be useful for > fingerprinting. Suggesting a constant polling interval for all NTP clients on > the Internet would probably not be a good idea. > >> 2. Existing widespread use of this value means we can be confident it >> won't break anything. > > 32 is not as common as 0, but it is used too. Another large precision that I > often see is 118. I've no idea where that comes from. > > -- > Miroslav Lichvar > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 29 23:06:48 2017 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 9E149127599 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:06:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nNaSzInDWcWI for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0FF01204DA for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D9B986DC29 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 06:06:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E62B786DAB3 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 06:06:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.155.52]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctTEA-0006zw-If for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 06:06:42 +0000 Received: from rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id ADF64730B0 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:06:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by rrzmta2.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A05773069 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:06:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:06:33 +0200 Message-Id: <58DCA067020000A10002566B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.2.2 Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:06:31 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: References: <20170327133842.GK8192@localhost> <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 194.94.155.52 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: Ulrich.Windl@rz.uni-regensburg.de X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" >>> Daniel Franke schrieb am 29.03.2017 um 17:47 in Nachricht : > On 3/29/17, Greg Dowd wrote: >> IIRC, there is a randomizer of a second or two attached to the calculation >> of the next poll in ntpd? > > IIRC you're correct, but the randomization is some number of whole > seconds. The fractional part of the second is determined by whenever > the SIGALRM happens to come in, which is not random. Anyhow, I think Actually I think that part is (depending on the number of fractional digits you look at) actually more random than the rest. With today's CPUs it almost unpredictable to estimate the atual number of cycles a sequence of instructions takes. Do you have real-life statistics material to proove your claims? > this is clearly out-of-scope for the IETF and should be taken to NTP > implementations' respective development lists. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Mar 30 00:26:07 2017 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 97FDB128D44 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:26:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Va0Lp1bsFU2l for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA7D91293E9 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:26:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DED486DC2A for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:26:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B3F86DAB3 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:26:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctUSt-0009VQ-QL for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:26:01 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99B5C63172 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:25:50 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 99B5C63172 Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 99B5C63172 Received: from localhost (holly.brq.redhat.com [10.34.24.121]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F9C55C894 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:25:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:25:48 +0200 From: Miroslav Lichvar To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Message-ID: <20170330072548.GG23511@localhost> References: <20170327153535.GA16225@localhost> <346830ae-cffd-0470-ae20-16fee166aa36@nwtime.org> <20170329094115.GC23511@localhost> <8D2BF679AAC7C346848A489074F9F8BF8C4D05AC@sjsrvexchmbx2.microsemi.net> <58DCA067020000A10002566B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <58DCA067020000A10002566B@gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:25:50 +0000 (UTC) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 209.132.183.28 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mlichvar@redhat.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Antw: Re: call for adoption (draft-dfranke-ntp-data-minimization) X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:06:31AM +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: > > IIRC you're correct, but the randomization is some number of whole > > seconds. The fractional part of the second is determined by whenever > > the SIGALRM happens to come in, which is not random. Anyhow, I think > > Actually I think that part is (depending on the number of fractional digits you look at) actually more random than the rest. With today's CPUs it almost unpredictable to estimate the atual number of cycles a sequence of instructions takes. Do you have real-life statistics material to proove your claims? I think the stability of the scheduling will depend on the HW, OS, and how busy is the system. In most cases it will probably be better than a typical network jitter on the Internet (few milliseconds). You can check it with tcpdump: # tcpdump -v -l -n port 123 and host $clientip and 'udp[8] & 15 = 3' | \ grep ' Transmit' Transmit Timestamp: 3699846941.374009549 (2017/03/30 09:15:41) Transmit Timestamp: 3699846949.374010294 (2017/03/30 09:15:49) Transmit Timestamp: 3699846957.374027043 (2017/03/30 09:15:57) Transmit Timestamp: 3699846965.374011576 (2017/03/30 09:16:05) Transmit Timestamp: 3699846973.374011486 (2017/03/30 09:16:13) Transmit Timestamp: 3699846981.374003976 (2017/03/30 09:16:21) Transmit Timestamp: 3699846989.374010205 (2017/03/30 09:16:29) Transmit Timestamp: 3699846997.374008774 (2017/03/30 09:16:37) Transmit Timestamp: 3699847005.374012529 (2017/03/30 09:16:45) In this case the ntpd client has scheduling stable to few tens of microseconds, i.e. the transmit timestamp has about 15 constant bits. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ 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 Mar 30 10:36:04 2017 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 767431293D6 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:36:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rTggLtfM3VzD for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:36:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lists.ntp.org (psp3.ntp.org [185.140.48.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8284812942F for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:36:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psp3.ntp.org (localhost.ntp.org [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D1286DC2B for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:36:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Delivered-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org Received: from mail1.ntp.org (fortinet.ntp.org [10.224.90.254]) by lists.ntp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F4E186DAB3 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:59:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sender-op-o11.zoho.com ([135.84.80.196]) by mail1.ntp.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ctE8T-0008ZU-2W for ntpwg@lists.ntp.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 13:59:48 +0000 Received: from dhcp-903f.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-903f.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.144.63]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1490795974546895.9237911583075; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 06:59:34 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: "rob@deepdivenetworklng.com" In-Reply-To: <36BF0983-CC2F-4D9B-9C8E-D12E9251C130@isoc.org> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:59:33 -0500 Message-Id: References: <43A1BBF9-9EF5-4117-ACE4-989A23E34452@isoc.org> <36BF0983-CC2F-4D9B-9C8E-D12E9251C130@isoc.org> To: "ntpwg@lists.ntp.org" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-ZohoMailClient: External X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 135.84.80.196 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: rob@deepdivenetworking.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mail1.ntp.org) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:35:57 +0000 Subject: Re: [ntpwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-ntp-bcp-02 X-BeenThere: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Working Group for Network Time Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "ntp-chairs@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Errors-To: ntpwg-bounces+ntp-archives-ahfae6za=lists.ietf.org@lists.ntp.org Sender: "ntpwg" QWxsLAoKSSBoYXZlIHNvbWUgZmVlbGluZyAodGhhdCBJIGhhdmUgZXhwcmVzc2VkIHdpdGggYSBm ZXcgb2YgeW91IGR1cmluZyB0aGUgbGFzdCBmZXcgbWVldGluZ3MpIHRoYXQgcGFydHMgb2YgU2Vj dGlvbiA0IG9mIHRoZSBCQ1AgZHJhZnQgIGNvdWxkIHVzZSBzb21lIG1vcmUgc3BlY2lmaWMgZGVz Y3JpcHRpb24gYW5kIHdvcmRpbmcuIEluIHBhcnRpY3VsYXIgaSBhbSB3b3JraW5nIG9uIGNsYXJp ZnlpbmcgYW5kIHN0cmVuZ3RoZW5pbmcgc2VjdGlvbnMgNC4xIGFuZCA0LjIuIEkgd2lsbCBzdWJt aXQgbXkgcmVjb21tZW5kZWQgdGV4dCB1cGRhdGVzIGluIHRoZSBuZXh0IGZldyBkYXlzLiBJIGRv buKAmXQgd2FudCB0byBqdXN0IG1ha2UgZ2VuZXJhbCBzdWdnZXN0aW9ucyBidXQgcHV0IGZvcnRo IGFsdGVybmF0ZSB0ZXh0IGZvciBjb25zaWRlcmF0aW9uLiBJIGtub3cgd2UgYXJlIHVwIHRvIHRo ZSBkZWFkbGluZSBzbyBJIHdpbGwgZ2V0IHRob3NlIG91dCB0aGlzIHdlZWsuCgpSb2IKCgoKUm9i ZXJ0IE5hZ3kKQ0VPIGFuZCBTZW5pb3IgRGl2ZU1hc3RlcgpjOiAgNDA4LjQ4MC41MTMzCnJvYkBk ZWVwZGl2ZW5ldHdvcmtpbmcuY29tCnd3dy5kZWVwZGl2ZW5ldHdvcmtpbmcuY29tCgoKCgo+IE9u IE1hciAyOCwgMjAxNywgYXQgMTA6MzYgUE0sIEthcmVuIE8nRG9ub2dodWUgPG9kb25vZ2h1ZUBp c29jLm9yZz4gd3JvdGU6Cj4gCj4gCj4+IE9uIE1hciAyOCwgMjAxNywgYXQgOTo1NyBBTSwgRGFu aWVsIEZyYW5rZSA8ZGZveGZyYW5rZUBnbWFpbC5jb20+IHdyb3RlOgo+PiAKPj4gT24gMy8yOC8x NywgRGVuaXMgUmVpbGx5IDxkZW5pcy5yZWlsbHlAc3BlY3RyYWNvbS5vcm9saWEuY29tPiB3cm90 ZToKPj4+IEkgY2FuIGxvb2sgZm9yIG1vcmUgc3RhYmxlIFVSTCdzIGlmIHNvdXJjZXMgbGlrZSBX aWtpcGVkaWEgd2lsbCBjYXVzZSBhCj4+PiBwcm9ibGVtLCBzbyB5b3UgY2FuIGV4cGVjdCB0byBz ZWUgY2hhbmdlcyB0aGVyZSwgdG9vLiBJZiBhbnlvbmUgaGFzCj4+PiBwYXJ0aWN1bGFyIHN1Z2dl c3Rpb25zIGZvciBiZXR0ZXIgY2l0YXRpb25zLCBwbGVhc2UgY29udHJpYnV0ZSEKPj4gCj4+IEkn bGwgc2VlIHdoYXQgSSBjYW4gZGlnIHVwIGFuZCBzZW5kIHN1Z2dlc3RlZCB0ZXh0IGNoYW5nZXMu Cj4+IAo+Pj4gSSBiZWxpZXZlIHdlJ3ZlIGRpc2N1c3NlZCB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQncyByZWZlcmVu Y2VzIHRvIG50cGQgYW5kIG50cC5jb25mCj4+PiBiZWZvcmUuIEkgdGhpbmsgaXQncyBtb3JlIGFj Y2VwdGFibGUgdG8gcmVmZXJlbmNlIGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9uLXNwZWNpZmljCj4+PiB0aGluZ3Mg aW4gYSBCQ1AgdGhhbiBpbiBhbnkgb3RoZXIgSUVURiBkb2N1bWVudCAtLSBsb3RzIG9mIHBlb3Bs ZSBpbiB0aGUKPj4+IGNvbW11bml0eSBhcmUgdXNpbmcgaXQsIGFmdGVyIGFsbCwgYW5kIHRoZSBk b2N1bWVudCBpcyBhIHJlZmxlY3Rpb24gb2YgdGhlCj4+PiBjdXJyZW50IHN0YXRlIG9mIHRoZSBj b21tdW5pdHkuIEFsc28sIG1vc3Qgb2YgdGhlIHN1Ym1pc3Npb25zIHdlJ3ZlIGhhZCBzbwo+Pj4g ZmFyIGFyZSBmcm9tIHBlb3BsZSBmYW1pbGlhciB3aXRoIG50cGQuIFdlJ3JlIGhhcHB5IHRvIHRh a2Ugc3VibWlzc2lvbnMKPj4+IHNwZWNpZmljIHRvIG90aGVyIGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9ucyBpZiB0 aGVyZSBhcmUgYW55IHByYWN0aWNlcyB0aGF0IGFyZQo+Pj4gd29ydGh3aGlsZSB0byBzaGFyZS4K Pj4gCj4+IE15IGZlZWxpbmdzIG9uIHRoZSBudHAuY29uZiByZWZlcmVuY2VzIGFyZSBtb3JlIGFs b25nIHRoZSBsaW5lcyBvZgo+PiAidGhpcyBkb2Vzbid0IHNlZW0gcmlnaHQiIHRoYW4gInRoaXMg aXMgd3JvbmciLiBLYXJlbi9EaWV0ZXIsIG1pZ2h0IEkKPj4gc3VnZ2VzdCByZXF1ZXN0aW5nIGFu IGVhcmx5IHJldmlldyBmcm9tIEdFTi1BUlQ/Cj4gCj4gRm9yIHRoZSByZWNvcmQsIEkgaGF2ZSBy ZXF1ZXN0ZWQgYW4gZWFybHkgR0VOLUFSVCByZXZpZXcuIAo+IAo+IEthcmVuCj4gCj4gX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KPiBudHB3ZyBtYWlsaW5n IGxpc3QKPiBudHB3Z0BsaXN0cy5udHAub3JnCj4gaHR0cDovL2xpc3RzLm50cC5vcmcvbGlzdGlu Zm8vbnRwd2cKCgpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f XwpudHB3ZyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKbnRwd2dAbGlzdHMubnRwLm9yZwpodHRwOi8vbGlzdHMubnRw Lm9yZy9saXN0aW5mby9udHB3Zw==