From nobody Sun Jul 1 06:04:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEBC4130EAA for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 06:04:01 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 CzMGJIIaB8fP for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 06:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AFB8130E79 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 06:03:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w61D3FBi022385 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 15:03:15 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03BAEB22D for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 15:03:56 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id HqgD0__94T6T for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 15:03:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A57CAEB200 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 15:03:55 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2018 15:03:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87k1qfyuo4.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: babel@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 01 Jul 2018 15:03:15 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B38D113.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B38D113.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B38D113.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Implicit indices (Stenberg) variant of the HMAC protocol X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2018 13:04:02 -0000 Appendix A. Implicit indices [This appendix describes the "implicit indices" variant of the protocol, which is different and incompatible to the "explicit indices" variant described in the body of this document. This section should either be integrated into the body of the document or be removed before publication of this document an RFC, depending on which protocol variant is finally chosen.] The protocol described in the body of this document explicitly sends indices as in each packet as part of the Cryptographic Seqno TLV. Observe that, except when a challenge is required, the index sent on the wire is identical to the index stored in the Neighbour Table, and therefore doesn't need to be sent explicitly except during challenges -- it is enough for it to participate in HMAC computation in order to protect against replay. The "implicit indices" variant of the protocol, due to Markus Stenberg and described in this appendix, uses this information to avoid sending indices explicitly and thus shave off 8 to 10 octets from almost every packet. The changes to the protocol are as follows. The pseudo-header includes the Index, and therefore has the following format: TBD The Cryptographic Seqno TLV no longer contains an Index, and therefore has the following format: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | PC +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ This TLV is now self-terminating, and therefore allows sub-TLVs. Packets containing the Challenge Reply and Challenge Request TLVs must contain an explicit index. Two encodings are possible: one uses Challenge Replies and Requests with an extra field for the sender's index, which complicates the encoding somewhat but makes these two TLVs self-terminating, the other one uses a new TLV that is used for carrying an Index, which uses up a new TLV number but makes it possible to reuse these two TLV with other protocols that require a nonce-based challenge. Packet transmission is modified as follows. If a packet contains a Challenge or a Challenge Reply, then the node inserts its index into the packet body. In any case, it uses its current index to generate the pseudo-header that will be used to compute the HMAC and shipping out the packet. (This implies that a packet must be parsed in its entirety before HMAC validation, which requires a robust parser.) Packet reception is modified as follows. Before checking the HMAC of a packet, the receiver checks whether the packet contains an explicit index. If this is the case, it uses the index contained in the packet in order to generate the pseudo header; if this is not the case, it uses the index contained in its neighbours table. If there is no index available for that neighbour (either because the table doesn't contain in an entry for this neighbour, or the entry doesn't contain an index), HMAC validation fails. The index and cryptographic seqno contained in the neighbours table are only updated after HMAC validation has succeeded. Since it is now impossible to differenciate between a failed HMAC and an index change, a node must send a challenge whenever HMAC validation fails. This implies that spoofed packets cause a spurious challenge, but that doesn't change the security properties of the protocol much, given that in any case replayed packets can be used to cause a spurious challenge. From nobody Sun Jul 1 21:48:39 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFFC9130E23 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 21:48:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 sCZF00IPKlOY for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 21:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in5.apple.com (mail-out5.apple.com [17.151.62.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1527120049 for ; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 21:48:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1530506915; x=2394420515; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=W2u9rkBQ8tlVlhS5yjE0D5lVhpSmpwv5S9Rew5+l80s=; b=si3EIbwp4A/2mUq1uCNGCUJDB12XfufKBeoe77Pucr4Fuhbs/mox5Cl6fNOr1EEk AQaJ7ktP3m79HsssBTmzUJHRdcVGHjBTr386eQaMq0XLUsET2nvIVgiMEQxFbr5a 58nrwh0UOtHhB6z44xoWb2hef7bd9jB3C9tsMBYLDwb/zgoWovx6ff/hgejfXU2z xzB+n+lAk5qwu3q8/teuYvr8lU5f8aDrzWdjpGZxKaT2eviBVjZI0mwBeqh8yDAq 0b5xfo/bzGMrhYqYKBtLvjTuBlmsegz3TjiSqZ2iSmh7+xL3b02cqAe3FUB6zLeT DstOdYkaYWa5fYwxqeX4+Q==; X-AuditID: 11973e13-62dff7000000242c-ae-5b39aea308d1 Received: from mr2-mtap-s02.rno.apple.com (mr2-mtap-s02.rno.apple.com [17.179.226.134]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in5.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 21.AB.09260.3AEA93B5; Sun, 1 Jul 2018 21:48:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com [17.128.115.155]) by mr2-mtap-s02.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PB8004OI2OZLZ10@mr2-mtap-s02.rno.apple.com>; Sun, 01 Jul 2018 21:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB800L002BZNB00@nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com>; Sun, 01 Jul 2018 21:48:35 -0700 (PDT) X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 7d6566e1ce32e60bd701207e1252a9a5 X-V-E-CD: 25db9c8def847da5f3c8f83d464a40b5 X-V-R-CD: fbd4a3ecf174248f2009b74dbcdd7cb8 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: 4ba36698-0bf3-4f41-8192-283fb87b90a7 Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB800H0026YWH00@nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com>; Sun, 01 Jul 2018 21:48:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-02_01:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp15.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.234.113.65] by nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PB80098A2OTAM20@nwk-mmpp-sz11.apple.com>; Sun, 01 Jul 2018 21:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi In-reply-to: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2018 21:48:29 -0700 Cc: babel@ietf.org, =?utf-8?Q?Weronika_Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , =?utf-8?B?Q2xhcmEgRMO0?= Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrHIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiuPlRm+7idZbRBnealCy2LOpmsdhweR2z xfzWZWwWHz7dYXVg8dg56y67x5IlP5k8Fm95y+jxavpD9gCWKC6blNSczLLUIn27BK6Mht4m poJjjhUvzx1gbGDca9TFyMkhIWAisXHnJ9YuRi4OIYEDTBKf1n5mAknwCghK/Jh8j6WLkYOD WUBdYsqUXIia9UwSJ15+ZIRwupgk7h5bzQQxiU1i/YklULaWxNPtz1lh7N4LC1hg7PY/P6Di nBLnv0xkh7B1JN4uuMEEMbSTSeL0qu3sIJslBLIldmwQhagJlvhzqIcZouYro8SeFY1gy4QF pCW6LtxlBakXBlpwYYUViMkGZB5YA/Ykp4CGxPn2WWAnsAioStxZNJkFZAyzwERGifsPG9hA EswC2hJP3l1ghXjeRuLG76NgcSGg5zct+Q0WFxFQkVg+7RnUzYoS/WsOsU1glJ6FFF6zEOE1 C8nUBYzMqxiFchMzc3Qz80z1EgsKclL1kvNzNzGCIni6nfAOxtOrrA4xCnAwKvHwLhCzjBZi TSwrrsw9xCjNwaIkzmuWZBotJJCeWJKanZpakFoUX1Sak1p8iJGJg1OqgTFy3twzvyYYzH13 v/PmD07lrTY3eVk2sRw7YHXjTKOfzGeF99r36iVOMT+IbrHbu9/EYdrCM1tOhdmsLpVda/9N l61p/1H9iQc267u6P6j/ePjwTK6pRln8emmMHQ2Ldr+33yt8se3eF2WlQ0+V/j/evD7hZoJv +S+Ow+c/zIm/cLI2fo5H8uN0JZbijERDLeai4kQArtH26MECAAA= Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 04:48:39 -0000 > On Jun 30, 2018, at 06:04, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >=20 > 0. Explicit vs. implicit Indices >=20 > The discussion between explicit (DKC variant) and implicit (Stenberg > variant) indices is still open. Just because we've made DKC code > available doesn't mean the WG needs to follow our idiosyncrasies. >=20 > (I'll try to find the inner strength to summarise the discussion at = some > point.) >=20 >=20 > 1. Implemented and MTI HMACs >=20 > We've followed Denis' text, and implemented SHA1 and RIPEMD160. Could = any > security specialists please advise: >=20 > - which algorithms should be implemented; > - which algorithms should we propose to the WG as Mandatory to > Implement (MTI)? I think SHA2-256 should be the only MTI, as it is considered secure and is widely available. > On a related note, should we be looking at algorithms other than HMAC? > The challenge mechanism is fairly generic, and the actual hashing is = just > a tiny part of the protocol. What other algorithms did you have in mind? I think HMAC fits what we need here. > 2. Should the HMAC cover the packet header? >=20 > The Babel packet header has the following format: >=20 > 0 1 2 3 > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Magic | Version | Body length | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ >=20 > Right now, Version is fixed at 2, but if we ever define Babel version = 3, > we might become susceptible to downgrade attacks. I don't recall why = we > skipped the header in HMAC computation, but I think it's a bug. >=20 > (As far as I can tell, 7298bis hashes the whole packet, including the > packet trailer.) Yes, it should cover the header to avoid tampering. > 3. Packet format >=20 > There are three new TLVs (HMAC, Challenge, Challenge Reply). They are > variable-length and therefore non-terminating in the sense of = rfc6126bis > Section 4.4, which means that they cannot carry sub-TLVs. This = follows > Denis' original design, and I think it's the right thing to do since = it > makes the packet format simpler. >=20 > Does anyone envision a need to carry sub-TLVs on these TLVs? I don't have any ideas for that. > 4. Challenge timeout >=20 > How long does a receiver have to reply to a challenge? We see no > vulnerability here, but we feel that a challenge reply coming a few = hours > late is at the very least suspicious. >=20 > (Our code apparently uses 300ms, but I think it's a bug -- it should = be on > the order of tens of seconds, since a peer is allowed to aggregate its > challenge reply with other unicast TLVs -- that's the first time I see > a convincing use-case for Unicast Hellos, by the way. Note that we = don't > necessarily know the peer's Hello and IHU intervals when we challenge. > Perhaps we should make the timeout explicit in the challenge TLV?) Having an Interval in the ChallengeRequest would be similar to Acknowledgment Requests, so that makes sense to me. > 5. Use of the packet trailer >=20 > The HMAC TLV is carried in the packet trailer, which makes it clear = which > part of the packet is protected by HMAC and avoids the need to clear = parts > of the packet body before hashing. (Think about extensibility -- = there > might be other TLVs in the future that must not be protected, and if > different extensions require clearing different parts of the packet, = we're > going to end up with some pretty enjoyable code obfuscation.) >=20 > Does anyone have technical arguments against the use of the packet > trailer? For the record, Denis didn't use a packet trailer, and David = has > expressed some mild reservations about its use (he feels that we're > trading specification simplicity for implementation simplicity and > extensibility, and while I agree with this, I happen to think it's the > right tradeoff in this particular case). >=20 > If we keep the trailer, well need to add something to 6126bis. I = suggest > the following RFCese: >=20 > - the packet trailer is a sequence of TLVs, just like the packet = body, > and the TLV number space is the same; > - a TLV that appears in the packet trailer MUST be ignored on = reception > unless its definition explicitly states that it is allowed in the > packet trailer; So far I agree. > - the mandatory bit MUST NOT be acted upon when it appears in the = packet > trailer; as a consequence, an implementation that doesn't grok any > TLVs that can appear in the trailer MAY simply ignore the packet > trailer without ever parsing it. I'm not sure I understand this. Why wouldn't mandatory sub-TLVs in the trailer behave like they do in the body? > 6. Cryptographic Seqno increase >=20 > A peer is allowed to increase its Cryptographic Seqno by an arbitrary > value (more than 1). This allows the use of fast-running counters, = for > example based on a hardware clock. >=20 > For example, an implementation might encode a 1=C2=B5s-granularity = clock in > the Cryptographic Seqno, end encode the top-order 16 bits in the = Index. > There would be a spurious challenge every 72 minutes, and the Index = would > overflow every 9 years (meaning you'd need to perform key rotation at > least that often). >=20 > Does anyone see a problem with that? SGTM > 7. Cryptographic Seqno size Can we call this the Packet Counter? We already have two seqnos in = Babel. > The Cryptographic Seqno is of a fixed size; if it overflows, the = sender > must pick a new index and suffer packet loss during at least one RTT > (while it's waiting for a new challenge). >=20 > The Cryptographic Seqno is currently 32 bits long. Does it make sense = to > reduce it to 16 bits? That would shave 2 octets from each packet, at = the > cost of more frequent challenges. I think it should stay at 32 bits, > since it makes it possible for people to use a fast-running counter = (see > point 5 above). >=20 > (In a stable network with 1000 nodes and the default parameters, = babeld > should be sending on the order of 1.2 packets per second. A 16-bit > counter will overflow after 15 hours, a 32-bit counter will overflow = after > 113 years. All bets are off if you use a fast-running counter, of = course.) Agree for 32bits. > 8. Index and Nonce size >=20 > Indices and Nonces are of variable size (up to the maximum TLV size): = our > implementation selects 80-bit values, but it will handle values of up = to > 251 resp. 255 octets (as much as fits in a TLV). >=20 > While having variable-length values slightly complicates the = implementation, > I think it's a good idea: >=20 > - an implementation might want to encode a cookie in the Nonce in = order > to have stronger DoS protection, thus needing a larger Nonce; > - an implementation with a stable clock might want to use a tiny = Index > (see point 5 above). Agree. > I suggest we should limit indices and nonces to 192 octets, indices = and > nonces larger than that MUST NOT be sent. This gives enough margin to > carry a nonce or index in a sub-TLV (which we're not currently = planning to > do, but what the heck). Not sure I see the benefit of this limitation. > (This means we allow 0-octet Nonces. Haha.) Nothing wrong with that, each node is responsible for their own security = choices. > 9. Lack of an ANM >=20 > Since the new protocol is not vulnerable to replay, we don't use > a separate ANM, but keep all the per-peer state in the ordinary = Neighbours > Table -- if a neighbour entry expires, we'll need to challenge again. > We intend to put this in the spec, and add an implementation note to > explain that implementations that wish to avoid spurious challenges = may > use a persistent ANM to keep the neighbour state. >=20 > Does anyone see a problem with that? SGTM I'd also add: 10. KeyID I think there is value in having a KeyID next to the HMAC to allow = better performance when using multiple keys. RFC7298 had a 16bit KeyID, and that sounded reasonable to me. David= From nobody Mon Jul 2 00:21:14 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 148E5130E40 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 00:21:12 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 toJZL6IkpJ2G for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 00:21:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06193130E0C for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 00:21:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w627KNRp022484; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:20:23 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3C02EB200; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:21:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id zdcQys5j0ooY; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:21:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D752AEB22E; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:21:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:21:03 +0200 Message-ID: <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: David Schinazi Cc: babel@ietf.org, Weronika =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Ko=B3odziejak?= , Clara =?ISO-8859-1?Q?D=F4?= In-Reply-To: <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:20:23 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B39D237.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B39D237.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B39D237.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 07:21:12 -0000 > I'd also add: > 10. KeyID > I think there is value in having a KeyID next to the HMAC to allow better > performance when using multiple keys. RFC7298 had a 16bit KeyID, > and that sounded reasonable to me. Please describe the user interface to that. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Jul 2 03:23:53 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D8EA130FDA for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:23:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 8mNuI4yTO75G for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:23:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7954C131030 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 03:23:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1530527006; bh=REWVk96KObNpgLwHmXG1XzcFHXi2vED0ACjfRz+GEsI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=k3rD91f4+N8xM1CSJ73nJkOTOufetpZ6yYHfKQ/syz555RhQGvXqzvwCo6W5CfZ/r /rJa5Mn+l9QFpH7x2O67DBelpmQjPx1g8z8FC+62qyDnJp2jU6nIVQ+5k2uBrbBT27 HVtqQ2i4qjW8OaVZn3d2LIG12wky/cbV+Xyo/GJiujjRyJQfrU81Fpr20lLyVOnWAa mtBNzy6MC/2CjpvhmKCf407gGEfJgAAREIeA9VUaVjFYE5NwaDv9yDSslb19Fw27Q/ v/96v/WqGB53spy0zMzxzD0zshgA+h/HuM2g9fI+gCfP4npkzCi/awbkNAb+QPNCw2 IJmDKhtogAHbg== To: David Schinazi , Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= , Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 12:23:35 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87tvpihr6g.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:23:51 -0000 David Schinazi writes: >> On Jun 30, 2018, at 06:04, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> >> 0. Explicit vs. implicit Indices >> >> The discussion between explicit (DKC variant) and implicit (Stenberg >> variant) indices is still open. Just because we've made DKC code >> available doesn't mean the WG needs to follow our idiosyncrasies. >> >> (I'll try to find the inner strength to summarise the discussion at some >> point.) >> >> >> 1. Implemented and MTI HMACs >> >> We've followed Denis' text, and implemented SHA1 and RIPEMD160. Could any >> security specialists please advise: >> >> - which algorithms should be implemented; >> - which algorithms should we propose to the WG as Mandatory to >> Implement (MTI)? > > I think SHA2-256 should be the only MTI, as it is considered secure and > is widely available. +1 on sha-256, but I think it might be worth considering blake2s as well, since that gives smaller sigs and is specifically designed for low-powered devices, such as mips-based routers :) -Toke From nobody Mon Jul 2 05:16:30 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2074130DFC for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 05:16:27 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 6l8aqwb7Kd6T for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 05:16:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A92B31277D2 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 05:16:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w62CFdrb020321 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Jul 2018 14:15:41 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w62CFpKL015940; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 14:15:51 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38EB7EB22D; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 14:16:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id oPmacGeOgFx2; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 14:16:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6759EB22E; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 14:16:16 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 14:16:16 +0200 Message-ID: <87h8lhvnn3.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <87tvpihr6g.fsf@toke.dk> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87tvpihr6g.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 14:15:41 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 14:15:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B3A176B.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B3A1777.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3A176B.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3A1777.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3A176B.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3A1777.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 12:16:28 -0000 > +1 on sha-256, but I think it might be worth considering blake2s as > well, since that gives smaller sigs and is specifically designed for > low-powered devices, such as mips-based routers :) Noted. We're putting in HMAC-SHA256 as MTI, we'll add recommendations for other algorithms later. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Jul 2 09:30:58 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 788F0130EDD for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:30:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 oBAjLIXkNCKR for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:30:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in4.apple.com (mail-out4.apple.com [17.151.62.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0C091311F5 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:30:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1530549049; x=2394462649; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=e43oLfpFpvNxH7APxoZStRSj4z5q96Ic9/MJGIRJstM=; b=b39gb6GktigYgqL6tfjnPQYvQcqk6xYF+5aLtYaxQ7HeYhm9qPDx/MnBXM0j8bEK vfhTvkaywfkjjmPlVdLkdjqLfKi35D8MmQSzU2yWsdb612B3n7xZyWM4IVz+wlPi a0LQ3zF1g5Y0gvFRL0HRYnLJYOG0LfLAA1vfuAU2z/dNkYNyFT4PhZa7WBUb8Nmn 9gX3YXrr1mkxvmfTBJjG/hhUmts06/c1WgfTw50WR2mYH8MafvrsdU1LRDbrh49k EFYRxge/FrJlDMpHuhuoUzCmfqspIhCqy4vBC3RL/cW0dkXoWQem+rjZH62O0iKL nEuOTQUIS2cnZVZt0M8yUg==; X-AuditID: 11973e12-ef58c9e0000010b7-bd-5b3a533988d9 Received: from ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com (ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com [17.40.76.7]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in4.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 93.D8.04279.9335A3B5; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:30:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com [17.128.115.216]) by ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PB8005JEZ746JE0@ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB800J00Z1S6600@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:30:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: f5dfe0d6-7230-4ac1-8271-88de12ef4e14 X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 7d6566e1ce32e60bd701207e1252a9a5 X-V-E-CD: 25db9c8def847da5f3c8f83d464a40b5 X-V-R-CD: fbd4a3ecf174248f2009b74dbcdd7cb8 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: 0c64823f-8730-4b08-8901-236038dbc604 Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB800I00Z10RD00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:30:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-02_05:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp18.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.234.91.176] by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PB800FCGZ6MCH00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi In-reply-to: <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:30:21 -0700 Cc: =?utf-8?B?Q2xhcmEgRMO0?= , =?utf-8?Q?Weronika_Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , babel@ietf.org Message-id: <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrGIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiqOHDrmsZbBVtcGiPmsWWRd0sFhsur2O2 mN+6jM3iw6c7rA4sHjtn3WX3WLLkJ5PH4i1vGT1eTX/IHsASxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJXRcfQU W8EHloqPO9YzNTC+ZO5i5OSQEDCR+L92N5DNxSEksI9JYsKbVUwgCV4BQYkfk++xdDFycDAL yEscPC8LEmYW0JL4/qiVBaJ+I5PErje3oJwuJonp8y4wQkzlkliw9TQrhK0r0fFlAlScTWL9 iSVMELaWxNPtz1lh7N4LC1hg7PY/P6DinBLnv0xkh7B1JC4fesMOsayTSeLbtMdQg7Il+udM Zga5VEIgWGL/W2WImq+MEot3bAB7U1hAWqLrwl1WkBphoAUXVliBmGxA5oE1RiAVnAIaEue2 XgU7k0VAVWLuyS1gfzELTGSUuPLuLwskUGwkJt7cAjZSSKBMYs60bjYQW0RARWL5tGdQdypK 9K85xDaBUXYWUjjOQoTjLKRwXMDIvIpRKDcxM0c3M89EL7GgICdVLzk/dxMjKOKn2wntYDy1 yuoQowAHoxIP7wVFq2gh1sSy4srcQ4zSHCxK4rxmSabRQgLpiSWp2ampBalF8UWlOanFhxiZ ODilGhj5uX4WLLDY2XX9xZ03oc4nFuctn/y0+edCmZ1vM1tO30xV2m4azLFtr4pAo7uU5bxL pmfEba/63arfXBYQydsfLM/a+2Pdygr5Yxa7Anf4JndlL972ILjlb7mkvZ0g476bikv/G76o O9Zy2nteSy/3l0ff0madYLvbqbrZRKpUeprs7Dydo3JKLMUZiYZazEXFiQCqJd2Y2QIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 16:30:53 -0000 >> 10. KeyID > >> I think there is value in having a KeyID next to the HMAC to allow better >> performance when using multiple keys. RFC7298 had a 16bit KeyID, >> and that sounded reasonable to me. > > Please describe the user interface to that. I'm not very familiar with the babeld user interface / config file, but I assume you have a place where you set either what the raw key value is or what the path to the key file is. Next to there you would add an integer. All nodes need to configure the same key, making sure they configure the same integer with that key sounds straightforward enough? David From nobody Mon Jul 2 09:39:39 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86A7130ECA for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:39:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 UzS1FPCoUqLB for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:39:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x232.google.com (mail-qt0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4999C130DC6 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:39:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x232.google.com with SMTP id c5-v6so14310482qth.5 for ; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:39:36 -0700 (PDT) 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=eAOrU46KKKjonEv3smVeT2MBIH0ufl6t5OnX3OUA/DI=; b=jQaZ/5vx0iA8ymkvHcH4CK2b1sXPCVGzZmb31VF1Sbca6MrrgKWt7lPAScqcLuSXmX gvNRmfo5zrBhbVhct49K3tNTuyr4xBOQ2RG6vE96BLjJYJNwuZS8KVkx6ege9zHRigug bhn1LpMy1POva/7chm20dGm2rWviIzbth81eG5FsWZ09hVpaQ/CLUeZReT6W6bolHlAT xL0tCFaAxqjQ4oys8SL5zoZmD4jWMRZZYvMDVswDf8rChK8BNuIVXLNK4oQvhIfwcb+8 4JunA3wBNa1QStkf9qJX09F8Iposzh4CVNsXwFFPTUjWT/JdpOqP4Z/5B/gOd5F80dta qYQg== 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=eAOrU46KKKjonEv3smVeT2MBIH0ufl6t5OnX3OUA/DI=; b=pvRkblsjVGFu7brs1aKVHumNBQIf7n5zfUklxMkGWGQASJdnvOSEMvXx3fkh8DW8sq Qgs3ha1Hb/1ow3MWRKQ0eD/FOxt0+9QYTprwQUFJgjkh9rDWC756fMEAH4mE8/a8qngO nDVbVLRFvtmSfU74EtcaNDXwIdhc2odAvXdm4XZGwaMzM6wgTqZnp0M5xR9E5Q2AIgXF kdTJO79XTUO0Ct87PepslNtDT366nBJvzj23Irx5vwqon63oN+YwTRAOIyi0RGXxkwIP Dxdm0C3iX8rK4wJbmVe+ei37dHA7tMgngReuOQZKq5jeJHPl4mOFWdfsZ0E4BSbAh91H EkDQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1L3FJMF0jClgXBF2OWfuB923hDZER+6OPBq9G2iGzZM2oOEead bLTeXbaTGaMJ4TGJtUmPXiiH8u/qbCjoTi22x8Y= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeggUHZq5onzb0a4nmCcsDoHkgAhyDAihSsN3JIMiCvXNeSMMRqigsGj7VdbAAgTO0qi5Y+Pr8bDXar1rSbkFw= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:683:: with SMTP id f3-v6mr24559542qth.104.1530549575378; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 09:39:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87tvpihr6g.fsf@toke.dk> In-Reply-To: <87tvpihr6g.fsf@toke.dk> From: Dave Taht Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:39:22 -0700 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Cc: David Schinazi , Juliusz Chroboczek , weronika.kolodziejak@gmail.com, clarado_perso@yahoo.fr, Babel at IETF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 16:39:38 -0000 Defeating SHA1 to my knowledge requires a ridiculous amount of data to obtain a collision. when the total amount of data you are covering ranges from 64-1500 bytes, I don't see a problem. (totally not a crypto expert here, however) From nobody Mon Jul 2 09:58:28 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5613D1294D0 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:58:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 4ccIDvzBQaTt for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:58:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 699571271FF for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 09:58:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1530550701; bh=Urb9t3O08Uyjfi0MS/efKdU0t+PM9BAuJE+WUrpoxRI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=VOkua12Zk5dqI/+gXXBzo+HThY07V1CnVp+fah8iD6+9/ea4np9Ajt1LlaaMS3n7j SYJ7v3tecEz+BvTMCpAOBpUO2Y/5VRkvXyT/ya/LPSTtlWNQPB4m5RJnsU1w/S1axr fWgXuWOmUOza33p64JCexJUBJ5BMzclmbxEvQVpVcQdS3ZbGgDjSb59gmLuTRxCOYC S8EqRFicVXbpf5n7o7dRX81tfflJOZINyciowCVBlws8k1Vz96I5K4j5OW5D7WHsj4 H1Ss2VclM2Vn7ZtpdBrsASW+FEhDUN+ZdWdaWPv2B7ryKCxHEClInWF4tZCvrMniMa 1mWcR2uSFJt9w== To: David Schinazi , Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= , babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 18:58:31 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 16:58:27 -0000 David Schinazi writes: >>> 10. KeyID >> >>> I think there is value in having a KeyID next to the HMAC to allow better >>> performance when using multiple keys. RFC7298 had a 16bit KeyID, >>> and that sounded reasonable to me. >> >> Please describe the user interface to that. > > I'm not very familiar with the babeld user interface / config file, > but I assume you have a place where you set either what the raw key > value is or what the path to the key file is. Next to there you would > add an integer. All nodes need to configure the same key, making sure > they configure the same integer with that key sounds straightforward > enough? But why is it needed? It's just one more thing to configure, which makes configuration more verbose and prone to errors... -Toke From nobody Mon Jul 2 10:05:57 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B774130F47 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:05:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 kkTF5dmlGm2g for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:05:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in2.apple.com (mail-out2.apple.com [17.151.62.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 051A8130F1E for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:05:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1530551155; x=2394464755; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=CdrUjWaJQmjmjJ4dQ21BP4tftZ/BFwqff95foH7kjj0=; b=jaAWyYvrWzldaIVH/1PVQMUZikE9pix9VPU9uBEQctI/9mdOTGP4AsaYvy4AKJYu 5empfI5QUcwxeRK3oNack21OegAd00HA3Iy1nld00+trSvYXuV5PnrDmnsukFN1Q 0WNnuYT+2Pk2V0hBq6FeNcsvNOgq4t3hh6kvaVHxXeRkNYkKuLZTRkoLK1AQf6gZ ZFIq/sOciC8UQnO5PPHeLY0cZNBQeg1Vha//uV16O2EIxZR/UC4qQFBUMb5Wac9A GX6tNRL+2W7c79RHqTuQghKEOdY/kPygA1gLy2stSls4c8j+oGBDaoM8zV2x0Bpv 3Sy0eIRF44xp8Hl6zuwwRA==; X-AuditID: 11973e11-a14739e000005b22-19-5b3a5b7239ab Received: from ma1-mtap-s02.corp.apple.com (ma1-mtap-s02.corp.apple.com [17.40.76.6]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in2.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id D6.A4.23330.27B5A3B5; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:05:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com [17.128.115.216]) by ma1-mtap-s02.corp.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PB900A490TKYMB0@ma1-mtap-s02.corp.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:05:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB900C00075TZ00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:05:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: eddd1ece-aebd-4f66-b283-a7046282f1dd X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 319a1c775657bc6582695a36a4aadeb6 X-V-E-CD: 25db9c8def847da5f3c8f83d464a40b5 X-V-R-CD: fbd4a3ecf174248f2009b74dbcdd7cb8 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: 1f407799-3296-48c9-93bd-2c18d6aabad1 Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB900L000TGDX00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:05:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-02_05:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp14.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.234.91.176] by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PB900FQJ0SECH10@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi In-reply-to: <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:05:01 -0700 Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek , =?utf-8?Q?Weronika_Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , =?utf-8?B?Q2xhcmEgRMO0?= , babel@ietf.org Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> To: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrAIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiqOHDplscbRVt0L+G2WLLom4Wiw2X1zFb zG9dxmax9f0KdosPn+6wOrB67Jx1l91jyZKfTB6Lt7xl9Nhy6CKbx6vpD9kDWKO4bFJSczLL Uov07RK4MhZeWctUsJCt4lnrQqYGxmbWLkZODgkBE4ljDxaxdTFycQgJ7GOSeN19gx0kwSsg KPFj8j2WLkYODmYBdYkpU3IhajYySdzp/8QM4XQxSfy9/5kdYhKXxIKtp6Gm6krsn/aYDcJm k1h/YgkTyCAJAS2JhbcNIcJaEr0XFrDA2O1/fkC1ckqc/zKRHaJcR2LuWXGIVZ1MEl/u/WSG qMmW6J8zGcoOlji5rpEdougro0TrkyNg9wgLSEt0XbjLCjJIGGjBhRVWICYbkHlgjRFIBaeA qsTzzsNgY1iA7PddX8DhwCywmVHiz/RmsASzgLbEk3cXWCFhYiPR0HyYCWLXIUaJTwsegD0g ImAv0fj1AtQzihL9aw6xTWCUnYUUjrMQ4TgLydgFjMyrGIVyEzNzdDPzjPQSCwpyUvWS83M3 MYKSwHQ7wR2Mx1dZHWIU4GBU4uG9oGgVLcSaWFZcmXuIUZqDRUmc1yzJNFpIID2xJDU7NbUg tSi+qDQntfgQIxMHp1QD44e3r9i3B86zX7ZgjZqYLafpbnb2yBq7dMn33+4GLdq8q9z2r0+V /7o3ui53Vz1cGbpjyooFsb+mJzNl6GZkWgW8M/z4/gnDnUeWfpxbN0e8WHzq8jztWY5HZykd vrd3l+F5bu0Zkdn/z3V+32j08OLbezkOQm/W7xM6kjhdh8P7jWPrBM2YvSeUWIozEg21mIuK EwE0THKa4wIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:05:57 -0000 > On Jul 2, 2018, at 09:58, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen = wrote: >=20 > But why is it needed? It's just one more thing to configure, which = makes > configuration more verbose and prone to errors... Without a KeyID, the receiving complexity is proportional to the number = of configured keys. That means that nodes configured with n keys not only spend O(n) times more CPU per received packet, they are also n = times more vulnerable to DoS attacks. This becomes a tradeoff between - better performance, slightly better security OR - slightly easier configuration, two bytes saved on the wire I'm not advocating that this is absolutely necessary, but I'd like to discuss the pros and cons in case people think of other ways this is better or worse. David= From nobody Mon Jul 2 10:11:28 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14FFD131092; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:11:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.65 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_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 o_Pr2uAsoxe4; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:11:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2686F13125D; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:11:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w62HAQIj014142 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:10:26 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w62HAekp004148; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:10:40 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6938DEB22E; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:11:08 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id VNv__4e1dO3m; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:11:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 155BDEB200; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:11:07 +0200 (CEST) Resent-From: Juliusz Chroboczek Resent-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:11:06 +0200 Resent-To: babel@ietf.org, homenet@ietf.org, babel-users@alioth.debian.org Delivered-To: jch@irif.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([81.194.30.253]) by mailhost.irif.fr (Dovecot) with LMTP id AbXpJN5bOls3RgAAP9ZUWg for ; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:07:42 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C7AEB22D for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:07:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3K8gM3R08FDM for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:07:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ADA4EB200 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:07:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.ietf.org (mail.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1900:3001:11::2c]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w62H7BPS003545 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:07:12 +0200 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A000A130F93; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:07:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: "Juliusz Chroboczek" , "Weronika Kolodziejak" , "Clara Do" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <153055125964.16504.16597811979443995327.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:07:39 -0700 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:10:26 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:10:40 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Default is to whitelist mail, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:07:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B3A5C82.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B3A5C90.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B3A5BBF.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3A5C82.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3A5C90.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3A5BBF.000 from mail.ietf.org/mail.ietf.org/null/mail.ietf.org/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3A5C82.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3A5C90.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3A5BBF.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Resent-Message-Id: <20180702171108.6938DEB22E@mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Archived-At: Subject: [babel] New Version Notification for draft-do-babel-hmac-00.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:11:21 -0000 A new version of I-D, draft-do-babel-hmac-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Juliusz Chroboczek and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-do-babel-hmac Revision: 00 Title: Babel Cryptographic Authentification Document date: 2018-07-02 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 17 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-do-babel-hmac-00.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-do-babel-hmac/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-do-babel-hmac-00 Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-do-babel-hmac Abstract: This document describes a cryptographic authentication mechanism for the Babel routing protocol that has provisions for replay avoidance. This document updates RFC 6126bis and obsoletes RFC 7298. 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. The IETF Secretariat From nobody Mon Jul 2 10:19:28 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 386A1130F39 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:19:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 Af5EHD_swOtb for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EA741311F5 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:19:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1530551950; bh=YjLCSpzGKhFPJYKKWdkJQpXOhLSrQ68P4BVcNsq091A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=NI4K0iHIcNVRVijMuMLU0GSbIIBwJeNWEf91/O+ZIbafnj9ueNMnFFhSkL0khUnUA cU1qZ+7aVPWuw60A0lkUue5HVe7b/JRXfYkVpPCT/q/UirhhOL/ENI/3xuqkYnMc6l KA6Pi+0Am2E7mHDjjHoWpHFq5l7rT5ClA08ShhMFWZnQ7gOIQWK2eIbomQlH55BdU6 w8RMfd72NcPl8vkfrN9Svuj5zzpDUpaWFkWjlCT2LNrJJBlsKCiaVXZJk7ZvNW5XYA GC4RYS4nxey1NDg6kkTOULu8VaTk+wJsty3oi+lULH/OpM7Zkx1K1prTYuXQSScUUa 3s8jceMzGHhnQ== To: David Schinazi Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek , Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= , babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:19:21 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87a7r9imhy.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:19:26 -0000 David Schinazi writes: >> On Jul 2, 2018, at 09:58, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: >>=20 >> But why is it needed? It's just one more thing to configure, which makes >> configuration more verbose and prone to errors... > > Without a KeyID, the receiving complexity is proportional to the number of > configured keys. That means that nodes configured with n keys not > only spend O(n) times more CPU per received packet, they are also n times > more vulnerable to DoS attacks. This becomes a tradeoff between > - better performance, slightly better security > OR > - slightly easier configuration, two bytes saved on the wire > > I'm not advocating that this is absolutely necessary, but I'd like to > discuss the pros and cons in case people think of other ways this > is better or worse. Hmm, I'm not sure that I am convinced that it is worth the tradeoff to add the key ID. But assuming it is: Is there any reason why this ID needs to be user configured? We could just define it as a 16-bit truncated hash of the key itself, or something like that? -Toke From nobody Mon Jul 2 10:42:02 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F191130DC3 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:41:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.309 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.309 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 xRnjCli7c3SA for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:41:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in5.apple.com (mail-out5.apple.com [17.151.62.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBA58130DCA for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:41:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1530553317; x=2394466917; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=JIcPUm8VxjjYvEUZhZ9RKPFCLsWF5MqPk9XqXQ6Ikeo=; b=GPu1YhpeLMVgDnoMI5lRzYsWtCRtE1w+r5c7Vjff7avmy0pJAWrg3JIUsRHW+Pg4 TBZ2EpMYHLpxvFeL2iz9Pp6qrdLeu6N0kv0n0TLqVNYOyW6Vp20o+iKqS0LBZ30e mrhxs6f2sTQPnChyBRywzjFkvmErfOySmyBWx0naF/Snl0DxJo/db0WsmQQOv5UN cKZCsXfFjTKEipjSznOkx/1KwpIQWk+gI6noT81eGs71FkYY4aexZo33gck14smn hvqCxwikYOIb0yySSwrUZxPjZXu7POD1BHzebotxccrGtwt+Cq1bb4Lt9eQngShA yONq2e3k/2bobbbpowxAAw==; Received: from relay2.asia.apple.com (relay2.asia.apple.com [17.82.200.16]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in5.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 2F.88.09260.4E36A3B5; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:41:57 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 11973e13-615ff7000000242c-8a-5b3a63e2d7e0 Received: from sng-mmpp-sz02.asia.apple.com ( [17.84.80.27]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay2.asia.apple.com (Apple Singapore relay) with SMTP id 7B.15.30791.2E36A3B5; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 01:41:54 +0800 (MYT) Received: from [17.192.155.180] by sng-mmpp-sz02.asia.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PB900HAK2HRM460@sng-mmpp-sz02.asia.apple.com>; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 01:41:54 +0800 (SGT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi Message-id: <0567A2E4-60F1-414E-BEC5-CB439AA07C22@apple.com> Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_06145895-4E7E-4C76-A976-C20104640CFA" MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:41:50 -0700 In-reply-to: <87a7r9imhy.fsf@toke.dk> Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek , =?utf-8?Q?Weronika_Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , =?utf-8?B?Q2xhcmEgRMO0?= , babel@ietf.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> <87a7r9imhy.fsf@toke.dk> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrELMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiGHRCQPdpslW0waU9/BZbFnWzWGy4vI7Z Yn7rMjaLre9XsFt8+HSH1YHVY+esu+weS5b8ZPJYvOUto8eWQxfZPF5Nf8gewBrFZZOSmpNZ llqkb5fAlfF8ywymgtkaFT+ebWVqYOxT7mLk5JAQMJH4M3UCaxcjF4eQwBYmia+nfzDCJA53 PmQFsYUEljFJPD5kAlHUwCTx7vM5sISwgLRE14W7QDYHB5uAlsSBNUYgYV4BG4lHfZfZQWxm gSSJXb/bGSHixhLrNy8EKxcGKr+wwgokzCKgKrH50H2wEk4gu+/PDyaQVcwCmxkl/kxvZgZJ iAjYSzR+vcACcUMfk8S3eV3MEIcqSvSvOcQGkpAQOMImcXBPN8sERqFZSJbPQrIcIq4tsWzh a2YIW1Nif/dyFkxxDYnObxNZFzCyrWIUyk3MzNHNzDPVSywoyEnVS87P3cQIiqTpdsI7GE+v sjrEKMDBqMTDe0HRKlqINbGsuDL3EKM0B4uSOK9Zkmm0kEB6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmrxIUYm Dk6pBsbkbo07q3zecG5P8qqfxbUx+LPMCY/iF/eq/oiIBYTtE9/2/J5wH8PN51YRTC4y5163 Jws6R1h91Arj/HKWMe8aj7AnS2npLxmOKlGnsE0Xw+yvnWAXCrSpW6oYmJH+Zf8HwXlvZK1N 7ismsx8/XKcTf8dm3nfWBZe3t75Je6N0dZ2I4d36R0osxRmJhlrMRcWJAFu3cX+FAgAA X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiGBIgrfso2Sra4NIjaYsti7pZLDZcXsds Mb91GZvF1vcr2C0+fLrD6sDqsXPWXXaPJUt+Mnks3vKW0WPLoYtsHq+mP2QPYI3isklJzcks Sy3St0vgyni+ZQZTwWyNih/PtjI1MPYpdzFyckgImEgc7nzICmILCSxjknh8yKSLkQvIbmCS ePf5HFhCWEBaouvCXSCbg4NNQEviwBojkDCvgI3Eo77L7CA2s0CSxK7f7YwQcWOJ9ZsXgpUL A5VfWGEFEmYRUJXYfOg+WAknkN335wcTyCpmgc2MEn+mNzODJEQE7CUav15ggbihj0ni27wu ZohDFSX61xxim8DIPwvJvllI9kHEtSWWLXzNDGFrSuzvXs6CKa4h0fltIusCRrZVjKJFqTmJ lUZ6icWZiXqJBQU5qXrJ+bmbGEExEHRCYAfjrEMGhxgFOBiVeHgXRFtFC7EmlhVX5h5ilOBg VhLh3aYKFOJNSaysSi3Kjy8qzUktPsQozcGiJM5rkVUbJSSQnliSmp2aWpBaBJNl4uCUamCU c+17mPsubX9Q79eDW3VvyC23/14yXeTDHm3tbFemNC7rmXWCagqN77m2MIp7LXHfv8r1WYny i03Pfnxr6tyvJyZ/0yfeXe1hkBtP0DudZb/u7rb5knYkTWpCU8tN5yXnbyh5yjuqFahxzRXX fqof9j4pMIg5Ytbs38s2OLbpeE2ZUSVcsESJpTgj0VCLuag4EQAGoLhWfQIAAA== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:42:00 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_06145895-4E7E-4C76-A976-C20104640CFA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On Jul 2, 2018, at 10:19, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen = wrote: >=20 > Hmm, I'm not sure that I am convinced that it is worth the tradeoff to > add the key ID. But assuming it is: Is there any reason why this ID > needs to be user configured? We could just define it as a 16-bit > truncated hash of the key itself, or something like that? I like this idea, but we'd have to be careful to not open up offline attacks this way. David= --Apple-Mail=_06145895-4E7E-4C76-A976-C20104640CFA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
On = Jul 2, 2018, at 10:19, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen <toke@toke.dk> = wrote:

Hmm, I'm not sure that I am convinced that it is worth the = tradeoff to
add the key = ID. But assuming it is: Is there any reason why this ID
needs to be user configured? We = could just define it as a 16-bit
truncated hash of the key itself, or something like = that?

I = like this idea, but we'd have to be careful to not open up = offline
attacks this way.

David
= --Apple-Mail=_06145895-4E7E-4C76-A976-C20104640CFA-- From nobody Mon Jul 2 12:36:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8434130DFD for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 12:35:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 58bZVhs49XK3 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 12:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E70C13129A for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 12:35:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1530560145; bh=SuKy+kd9r/Ta67QAUVmjjhNqdQjGTQjVZKNyjhL30qA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=nAv1kkHxZzyKJVAErH3uo3WxWHSaiUU60hrc118prEJIE7npQ8X4zgloQnxJvZuWf SDBSHU84ANolmtrZkI35K0Eg3ScoFCUZvcIfCGqsFOv5ZrmQiTYO+UDc373iP1UBRh JCPX+DsS/Zrjykoabp+SjpHefrDvl7mhoIvXv3SmWVKGJxh6+v7OSAB6NeZe6fdSoG CKcgSiyfZn8x2UxbR62p/C6GDyIJS2GA5NMerEKKnAsLG4GT3dmJ0DjrraoQ8Ys4Jh +rCVhWwdxP9pyFC+PN5dn/koaDmAK+6QiGm/RIVY08tegWbCEhBkBA+Z/Sl7c9ybjr eNW6PqKlC/+sw== To: David Schinazi Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek , Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= , babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <0567A2E4-60F1-414E-BEC5-CB439AA07C22@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> <87a7r9imhy.fsf@toke.dk> <0567A2E4-60F1-414E-BEC5-CB439AA07C22@apple.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 21:35:55 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87woudh1lw.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:36:01 -0000 David Schinazi writes: >> On Jul 2, 2018, at 10:19, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: >>=20 >> Hmm, I'm not sure that I am convinced that it is worth the tradeoff to >> add the key ID. But assuming it is: Is there any reason why this ID >> needs to be user configured? We could just define it as a 16-bit >> truncated hash of the key itself, or something like that? > > I like this idea, but we'd have to be careful to not open up offline > attacks this way. Yeah, it should be purely an optimisation, and all security properties should be derived from the full HMAC. And we should be able to handle duplicate keyIDs due to collisions. So as long as it is implemented as: if (keyid !=3D hash16bit(key_bytes)) { skip HMAC tlv } and not if (keyid =3D=3D hash16bit(key_bytes) && !is_valid(hmac)) { reject packet } we should be fine, I think... -Toke From nobody Mon Jul 2 16:50:55 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E25B5130EDD for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 16:50:52 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 1AW3mpdhp_Xi for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 16:50:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE057130E1B for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 16:50:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w62No3a1022855 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 3 Jul 2018 01:50:03 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w62NoGQo024717; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 01:50:16 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9ABEEB22D; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 01:50:44 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id ljv0O-OExu8E; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 01:50:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9322EB200; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 01:50:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 01:50:43 +0200 Message-ID: <87po05p57w.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: David Schinazi Cc: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Tue, 03 Jul 2018 01:50:03 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Tue, 03 Jul 2018 01:50:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B3ABA2B.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B3ABA38.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3ABA2B.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3ABA38.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3ABA2B.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3ABA38.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 23:50:54 -0000 >> But why is it needed? It's just one more thing to configure, which makes >> configuration more verbose and prone to errors... > Without a KeyID, the receiving complexity is proportional to the number of > configured keys. That means that nodes configured with n keys not > only spend O(n) times more CPU per received packet, Where n is just the number of keys configured, and not something an attacker can control (see Sections 1.1 and 4.3 of draft-do-babel-hmac). In practice, I expect n to be usually just 1, and at most 2 during key rotation. Without an explicit KeyID, the set of keys is just a set -- it can be implemented for example as a directory of keys, where adding a new key is just an scp to the directory, or it can be implemented as a set of TLVs flooded by HNCP, where adding a key consists in flooding a new TLV. If you have an explicit KeyID, then you need to make sure that the KeyID is consistent among all of the routers in a given security domain. You can no longer just scp the key, you need to pick a KeyID that is currently unused. If you're using an automated distribution protocol, then the protocol must be able to choose a KeyID that is currently unused not only by nodes that participate in said protocol, but also by nodes that don't. Worse is better, David. It is better to have a protocol that has a slight inefficiency but is easy to deploy and to manage, than a protocol that is slightly more efficient but that nobody will want to deploy because of the very significant complications due to the KeyID. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Jul 2 17:06:11 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F8F2130FF5 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:06:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 JKGX5zuMff81 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:06:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in4.apple.com (mail-out4.apple.com [17.151.62.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D89D8130E1D for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:06:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1530576363; x=2394489963; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=fqMiGsxr7Sg33T6fVY4Uv3WWlNh3/pmRmRdRNfJT/f4=; b=aayZulHsD+XwYmbKQV/OMZfSBKhjGp5BKEOXMyb+1VmbgLX5O19bmcn9S0ztty+y TVtrP0I634WYazNYAFp+SSUz3SxqoA8LsSqJUgi4tqaXzM/JoZlcZnwDyCYKa8P2 S4Lij/0XWZaITuuNTyLErFtCIy3NHMjdbjOW5fau8O6zmYl5dBn6Yb424OPbotCE WDV7azo8P2/y5XnywmxJwT5FdeNnLvYCm/t+yhgq/M8vEFOYJcZG2pBn+Kh0ucQh ArtJ7eSKSVsXxsshhQQgn+EcL9qr6RDv+Eg7IKo5Y2ULllqh3p7/pU/oRJkkLzd6 Ng22gAaGOQ6f8VhjMYIPqA==; X-AuditID: 11973e12-9e9ff700000010b7-c6-5b3abdebf014 Received: from mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com (mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com [17.179.226.135]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in4.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id DA.B4.04279.BEDBA3B5; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:06:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com [17.128.115.216]) by mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PB900K75KA3JQ50@mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:06:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB900K00K0GEX00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:06:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: e9588a0c-67be-44bf-89e9-de7cbd2c12f3 X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 7d6566e1ce32e60bd701207e1252a9a5 X-V-E-CD: 25db9c8def847da5f3c8f83d464a40b5 X-V-R-CD: fbd4a3ecf174248f2009b74dbcdd7cb8 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: c748ea1a-d3a8-412e-8416-d6ff22f3c919 Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PB900E00JMKU900@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:06:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-02_08:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp18.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.192.155.180] by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PB900B7IKA1FEA0@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:06:01 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi In-reply-to: <87po05p57w.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 17:06:00 -0700 Cc: babel@ietf.org Message-id: <7E81074A-F3BB-470A-8197-C4195AE806DC@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> <87po05p57w.wl-jch@irif.fr> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrIIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiuPlRu+7rvVbRBjv2m1hsWdTNYjG/dRmb A5PHkiU/mTwWb3nLGMAUxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJXx4uoz1oK1IhWfp05nbWDsE+hi5OSQEDCR +HL3M2MXIxeHkMABJomvl24ygyR4BQQlfky+x9LFyMHBLCAvcfC8LEiYWUBL4vujVhaI+vVM EucnHWSCcLqYJPp/bGGCmMolsWDraVYIW1fi4fX3UDabxPoTS6BqtCSebn/OCmP3XljAAmO3 //kBFeeUOP9lIjuErSOx+usDsOOEBDqZJDruBEHEsyXWft7ICHKohECwxP63yhD3fGOUuLhi BdgcYQFpia4Ld1lBaoSB5l9YYQVisgGZB9YYgVRwCmhInHjXDXYBi4CqRG//TjaIf4Ukzlyb wQIJEhuJeceuskKMn8gkcWQlxDkiAioSy6c9gzpTUaJ/zSG2CYyys5CCcRYiGGchBeMCRuZV jEK5iZk5upl5JnqJBQU5qXrJ+bmbGEFxPN1OaAfjqVVWhxgFOBiVeHgvKFpFC7EmlhVX5h5i lOZgURLnNUsyjRYSSE8sSc1OTS1ILYovKs1JLT7EyMTBKdXAuHHviauv2Jjyb+044V79f8Kv ybGZC/7ePdUV+1+4JfnfJ/vX0+7tL1o85WIcw6mLxU/+FHi8tJkvsXFCvsIWHbnvETdDS3Zu Od/ZefWLt5y8Q6Bjq+mKRzWJ73/caoowjUwvY0rfKvN38VL59Sp6LHsVb6zNYRDhros7GOa/ 8eKVfA8Gpv63m5VYijMSDbWYi4oTAXexZPTEAgAA Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 00:06:09 -0000 > On Jul 2, 2018, at 16:50, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > >>> But why is it needed? It's just one more thing to configure, which makes >>> configuration more verbose and prone to errors... > >> Without a KeyID, the receiving complexity is proportional to the number of >> configured keys. That means that nodes configured with n keys not >> only spend O(n) times more CPU per received packet, > > Where n is just the number of keys configured, and not something an > attacker can control (see Sections 1.1 and 4.3 of draft-do-babel-hmac). > In practice, I expect n to be usually just 1, and at most 2 during key > rotation. In homenet there was discussion of pairwise symmetric keys distributed via HNCP. So n could be quadratic in the number of routers. > Without an explicit KeyID, the set of keys is just a set -- it can be > implemented for example as a directory of keys, where adding a new key is > just an scp to the directory, or it can be implemented as a set of TLVs > flooded by HNCP, where adding a key consists in flooding a new TLV. If you have a TLV you use to deploy the key, you can deploy the KeyID as the first two bytes of that TLV. That way both the KeyID and key are flooded together. > If you have an explicit KeyID, then you need to make sure that the KeyID > is consistent among all of the routers in a given security domain. You > can no longer just scp the key, KeyID does not prevent scp, just put the keyID in the name: scp my_new_secret.key babel-router42.local:/etc/babeld/keys/foo-12345.key > you need to pick a KeyID that is currently > unused. If you're using an automated distribution protocol, then the > protocol must be able to choose a KeyID that is currently unused not only > by nodes that participate in said protocol, but also by nodes that don't. I don't see why. Having a KeyID conflict just means you'll try both keys. > Worse is better, David. It is better to have a protocol that has a slight > inefficiency but is easy to deploy and to manage, than a protocol that is > slightly more efficient but that nobody will want to deploy because of the > very significant complications due to the KeyID. I'm less worried about efficiency and more about robustness to DoS. An implementation is free to always send KeyID as 42 and silently drop any HMAC TLV KeyID that isn't 42 if it can't handle the complexity. In general I agree with your position that adding unnecessary complexity is bad. But here I'm not sure I agree with how much complexity this actually represents. David From nobody Mon Jul 2 17:28:14 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 957BC130E99 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:28:12 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 qWyMHme3p8IB for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAC721292F1 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w630ROgf028449; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:27:24 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 399C8EB22D; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:28:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id TTnxruULEDHv; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:28:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25371EB279; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:28:05 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 02:28:05 +0200 Message-ID: <87muv9p3hm.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: David Schinazi Cc: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <7E81074A-F3BB-470A-8197-C4195AE806DC@apple.com> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <411E2C9F-A910-4899-8DD7-92C0C85EBC54@apple.com> <87sh523xy8.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E5E0D4C-0049-47D1-ACFA-31EA0F843237@apple.com> <87d0w5ingo.fsf@toke.dk> <375EE128-E5F3-487C-9A9E-89A8C976489F@apple.com> <87po05p57w.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7E81074A-F3BB-470A-8197-C4195AE806DC@apple.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Tue, 03 Jul 2018 02:27:24 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B3AC2EC.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3AC2EC.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3AC2EC.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 00:28:13 -0000 >> you need to pick a KeyID that is currently unused. > I don't see why. Having a KeyID conflict just means you'll try both keys. Ah, that's the bit that I was missing -- you allow multiple keys with the same ID. So the UI issue goes away -- you just set the KeyID to 0 by default. And an implementation is free to ignore KeyIDs on reception. I lift my opposition. If the WG wants KeyIDs, and provides me with suitable text to put in the spec, I'll implement them. In which case I reserve the right to make sarcastic comments in public. > An implementation is free to always send KeyID as 42 and silently drop > any HMAC TLV KeyID that isn't 42 if it can't handle the complexity. Nah, you just check all keys, ignoring their KeyID. In other words, the KeyID degenerates to a field that "may be ignored on reception". > In homenet there was discussion of pairwise symmetric keys > distributed via HNCP. That's not what the protocol was designed for. We send one HMAC per key in every freaking packet, and if we've got more than 60 or so, we'll quite simply run out of space in the Ethernet frame. All keys, no data, the drunken cryptographer's dream. If you want pairwise keying, use a protocol that uses pairwise communication. Also known as unicast. I hear you're the co-author of just such a protocol. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Jul 2 17:30:08 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB9F130E99; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:30:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.651 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 GBIfmk5Yo6e7; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD5151292F1; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 17:29:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w630TGXZ028600; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:29:16 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FC43EB22E; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:29:58 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id xocnQkan-ty4; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:29:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E329FEB22D; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 02:29:56 +0200 (CEST) Resent-From: Juliusz Chroboczek Resent-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 02:29:56 +0200 Resent-To: babel@ietf.org, babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org, homenet@ietf.org Delivered-To: jch@irif.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([81.194.30.253]) by mailhost.irif.fr (Dovecot) with LMTP id EX8xJsVaOlsKRQAAP9ZUWg for ; Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:03:01 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A546EB22D for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:03:01 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WgPr38-TreMf for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:02:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73AC0EB22E for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:02:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.ietf.org (mail.ietf.org [4.31.198.44]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w62H2TlA002458 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 19:02:30 +0200 Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA69D13121C; Mon, 2 Jul 2018 10:02:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: "Antonin Decimo" , "Juliusz Chroboczek" , "David Schinazi" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <153055097795.16480.13572700827677699832.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2018 10:02:57 -0700 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Tue, 03 Jul 2018 02:29:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Default is to whitelist mail, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 02 Jul 2018 19:02:31 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B3AC35C.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B3A5AA5.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3AC35C.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B3A5AA5.002 from mail.ietf.org/mail.ietf.org/null/mail.ietf.org/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3AC35C.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B3A5AA5.002 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Resent-Message-Id: <20180703002958.2FC43EB22E@mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Archived-At: Subject: [babel] New Version Notification for draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01.txt X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 00:30:02 -0000 A new version of I-D, draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Antonin Decimo and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-decimo-babel-dtls Revision: 01 Title: Babel Routing Protocol over Datagram Transport Layer Security Document date: 2018-07-02 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 8 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-decimo-babel-dtls/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01 Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01 Abstract: This documents describes how to use Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) to secure the Babel Routing Protocol. 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. The IETF Secretariat From nobody Tue Jul 3 09:01:54 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320D6130F66; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 09:00:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , Cc: martin.vigoureux@nokia.com, babel@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <153063361319.4893.13163197205758940269.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 09:00:13 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] babel - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 102 X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2018 16:00:20 -0000 Dear Donald Eastlake, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. babel Session 1 (1:30 requested) Tuesday, 17 July 2018, Morning Session I 0930-1200 Room Name: Saint-Paul/Sainte-Catherine size: 100 --------------------------------------------- iCalendar: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/sessions/babel.ics Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Babel routing protocol Area Name: Routing Area Session Requester: Donald Eastlake Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 1.5 Hours Number of Attendees: 42 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: netconf netmod rtgwg idr lpwan homenet manet bess Second Priority: dnsop 6man v6ops i2rs mptcp Third Priority: saag dnssd tsvwg lsr People who must be present: Donald E. Eastlake 3rd Russ White Alia Atlas Martin Vigoureux Resources Requested: Special Requests: Meeting toward the end of the day Thursday or in the last slot Thursday seems to work well for BABEL. --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Fri Jul 6 09:38:57 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietf.org Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAA91310A2; Fri, 6 Jul 2018 09:38:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.81.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG , babel@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <153089513305.5282.17212422764290898081.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 09:38:53 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [babel] WG Action: Rechartered Babel routing protocol (babel) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 16:38:56 -0000 The Babel routing protocol (babel) WG in the Routing Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs. Babel routing protocol (babel) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Current status: Active WG Chairs: Donald Eastlake Russ White Assigned Area Director: Martin Vigoureux Routing Area Directors: Alvaro Retana Deborah Brungard Martin Vigoureux Mailing list: Address: babel@ietf.org To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/babel/ Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/babel/ Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-babel/ Babel is a loop-avoiding, distance vector routing protocol with good provisions for dynamically computed link metrics. The core of the Babel protocol and security extensions are described in Experimental Independent Stream RFCs 6126, 7557, and 7298. These RFCs are the basis of three independent, open source implementations. There is some production deployment of these implementations, notably in hybrid networks (networks that include classical, wired parts with meshy radio bits) and in global overlay networks (networks built out of large numbers of tunnels spanning continents). The Working Group will focus on moving the Babel protocol to IETF Proposed Standard with IETF review. This includes clarifying RFC 6126 and integrating RFC 7557 and feedback provided by independent implementations, and resolving comments. It is not a requirement that the Babel protocol produced is backwards compatible with RFC 6126. It is a requirement that Babel support at least one profile that is auto-configuring. Other documents that are relevant to the above work can also be produced. Particular emphasis will be placed on work needed for a Proposed Standard routing protocol, such as ensuring manageability and strong security. Link metric measurement or link metric calculation procedures significantly more complex that those currently in Babel are out of scope. The Babel WG should coordinate with other Working Groups, such as the HOMENET WG for likely applicability, the RTGWG and V6OPS WG about Source-Specific Routing to support IPv6 multihoming, the PIM WG for discussion around multicast, and the MANET WG for considerations around wireless. The Babel WG should liaise as necessary with the Broadband Forum to facilitate use of the Babel Information Model for TR-069. Work Items: - Produce a revision of RFC 6126 suitable for publication as a Proposed Standard -- incorporate in the revision developments since RFC 6126 -- resolve technical issues found -- include in the base specification the extensibility work in RFC 7557 -- support auto-configuration -- consider any important changes based on experience with Babel to date. - Address security needs for BABEL. This may include using the techniques in RFC 7298, or other alternatives. Security may be included in the base spec or the base spec may normatively reference a separate Proposed Standard specification. This is required as part of moving Babel to Proposed Standard. - Address manageability of Babel by producing a Babel informational model to help provide guidance and derive the data models. This information model is useful as a common source of information for the case where the Customer-Premise Equipment (CPE) is managed by the Service Provider (SP) with the Broadband Forum TR-069 protocol and its associated data model. To be consistent with the ongoing effort to use YANG data models in the Routing Area, a Babel YANG data model should be specified to support management of Babel routers. - As the Proposed Standard version of Babel is completed, an Applicability Statement should be finalized to guide those potentially interested in deploying Babel. This Applicability Statement may include deployment advice and will be published as an RFC. - The Working Group should document its ongoing implementation experience with Babel, so that new WG participants can understand the state that is driving this work and the experience driving changes. This documentation may be on the Working Group's wiki, in an internet-draft that isn't expected to be published as an RFC, or a combination. - As a non-primary focus, the Working Group may work on multicast aspects of Babel. This may include discussion of any potential issues for supporting Babel running with PIM-SM in an auto-configuration profile. It may include exploring Babel carrying separate metrics for multicast. It may include discussion and consultation with the PIM WG about Babel providing the ability to build multicast routing tables. With AD and WG agreement, once an approach is understood, then a milestone may be added for an associated document targeted as Proposed Standard. - As a non-primary focus, the Working Group may work on documents defining source specific routing extensions for Babel as a way of handling IPv6 multihoming. Milestones: Jul 2016 - WG adoption of Babel Applicability draft Jul 2016 - WG adoption of RFC6126bis Oct 2016 - WG adoption of Babel Management (Info Model & YANG Model) draft Jul 2017 - IESG Submission of RFC6126bis and potentially companion security mechanisms draft (Proposed Standard) Jul 2017 - IESG Submission of Babel Management draft (Proposed Standard) Aug 2017 - IESG Submission of Babel Applicability draft (Informational) From nobody Sat Jul 7 02:55:26 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D56D5130DF3; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 02:55:23 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 mEQmIwV-vmg1; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 02:55:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BDB6130DEE; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 02:55:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w679sb4M016190 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 7 Jul 2018 11:54:37 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w679soKr028288; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 11:54:50 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B017EB200; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 11:55:19 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id INdADwTfhhLj; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 11:55:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C7680EB22E; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 11:55:16 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2018 11:55:16 +0200 Message-ID: <87y3en4bgb.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: babel@ietf.org, babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org, homenet@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sat, 07 Jul 2018 11:54:37 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sat, 07 Jul 2018 11:54:50 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B408DDD.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B408DEA.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B408DDD.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B408DEA.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B408DDD.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B408DEA.002 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] A summary of Babel cryptographic extensions X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2018 09:55:24 -0000 Hi, and sorry for the massive cross-posting. I suggest followups should go to babel@ietf. The mails that I'm receiving indicate that we (Babel@IETF) have confused some people with our crypto plans. Thanks to all for your questions, and let me please try to clarify things publicly. Considering security, I am concerned by the tension between simple, auditable protocols and excessive complexity due to additional features. Of course, we could just design a simple protocol and say that extra features are out of scope, but many of the feature requests are actually legitimate (confidentiality, asymmetric keying, pairwise keying, ASN.1, etc.). So we're currently pushing for having two protocols for Babel: - HMAC for Babel [1,2,3], which is simple, understandable, implementable, and has almost no dependencies, but requires minimal changes to Babel, but has minimal features (static symmetric keying only, no pairwise keying); - Babel over DTLS [4], which pushes the crypto down to DTLS, and therefore has all the creepy features of your DTLS implementation -- at the cost of depending on a DTLS library, which some feel is overkill. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7298 [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ovsienko-babel-rfc7298bis [3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-do-babel-hmac [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls (References draft-ovsienko and draft-do are two competing protocols, both based on RFC 7298; I'm supporting draft-do or something based on it.) Both protocols have implementations [5,6], and independent reimplementations are in progress or at least being considered. Details are likely to change, but the implementations are mature enough for experimentation. [5] https://github.com/MisterDA/babeld branch unicast-dtls [6] https://github.com/wkolod/babeld branch hmac-challenge What I'd like to see eventually is: - both protocols published as RFCs; - one of the protocols being the recommended protocol (I'm kibbitzing for HMAC); - all publicly available implementations of Babel supporting the recommended protocol, at least as a compile-time option. Concerning Homenet -- Homenet will need at some point to decide what HNCP security looks like, and decide how it interacts with Babel security. My personal opinion at this early stage is that HNCP should perform key negociation and distribute symmetric keys to Babel-HMAC, but I know that at least one prominent visionary in the Homenet community feels rather strongly about asymmetric or pairwise keying. Given that HMAC security is probably going to depend on DTLS anyhow, it's not unreasonable to require Babel-DTLS in Homenet. We'll try to arrange for presentations on the subject at IETF Montréal, but all the parties involved are rather busy, so it's not a given. I hope this clarifies things, -- Juliusz From nobody Sat Jul 7 09:55:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E11C1130E7B for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 09:54:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.309 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.309 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 p4hKDRoLzbFy for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 09:54:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in7.apple.com (mail-out7.apple.com [17.151.62.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 703E4130E6E for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 09:54:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1530982497; x=2394896097; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=aCnO+K+ReZlt0YOlnKoOMYdnFJMPrMjZ1gtWQMuH538=; b=0PgmfJOk2s0IaLCATKuVyvBA5I3eQ7nHzYrgGuiIruSk+xxlddiPnDMEgpw2ZZeZ u/DZRv21+UJlP9BZj7dzaSTVbqTq7yzREKnEZdHg8aPzks/yeUD9egFfKTGc20DE HC3jV6c1bsEfJ8euxlgSsS4bTbJgH7Adt/WMGcG0SMRzUkosL0LE9mqf/2H3bEUI p3eQAzt1hPk8JuZgLWeAV5XkMiBFohYSqHNvoShxh9cIX0Wtiwp9QTUXPsRWsQEZ McNA8dr5y44Ms/ZQbtbGta6FSIWnDFsVnLB2yU6agg3WMsITDnjH2F+psBaRkUoK uOkaVaQl2hnvSnFdbyby/A==; X-AuditID: 11973e16-6d9ff7000000740c-e5-5b40f06038f4 Received: from mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com (mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com [17.179.226.135]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in7.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id E8.E5.29708.060F04B5; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 09:54:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_v8zEUNyKdOVRQnJjN156DQ)" Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com [17.128.115.216]) by mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PBI009OK9NKHG40@mr2-mtap-s03.rno.apple.com> for babel@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2018 09:54:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PBI009009B7DQ00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com> for babel@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2018 09:54:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-A: X-Va-T-CD: e44de9e31641fff1e9b6320dd73bfbeb X-Va-E-CD: 61da529eb07a35fde2f6185aa5aa6a26 X-Va-R-CD: e8fb9491f31c18243f3d912db24e865e X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: 5df30f5d-23a3-4342-b057-d352aba91ec5 X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: e44de9e31641fff1e9b6320dd73bfbeb X-V-E-CD: 61da529eb07a35fde2f6185aa5aa6a26 X-V-R-CD: e8fb9491f31c18243f3d912db24e865e X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: 010e9986-abf4-445f-8319-3117d8adf629 Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PBI00C008A1SR00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com> for babel@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2018 09:54:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-07_04:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp15.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.234.86.81] (unknown [17.234.86.81]) by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PBI000329NJBV20@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com> for babel@ietf.org; Sat, 07 Jul 2018 09:54:56 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2018 09:54:55 -0700 Message-id: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> To: babel@ietf.org X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15F74) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrJIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiuPlRu27iB4dog2v/mS22LOpmcWD0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxqXO9WwFr3Urena+YWxgfKbexcjJISFgIrH30z2mLkYuDiGB A0wSt9cuYAdJ8AoISvyYfI+li5GDg1kgTGJ6szFEzSEmiZ2njrBCOHOZJHb8m8oIMYld4s+v HSwQtrbEh8a5jDD27wOtzCCDQOztrfIQYS6JBVtPs0LYuhLbv/6DamWTWH9iCROErSXx4+g6 VohWLYnb28thwnNO3mWDsDklzn+ZyA5h60j0v/vKBnHaHCaJI59boeZnS7RuXA01M1jiz6Ee ZoiiRUwSTxZ9AusWFpCW6LpwF2wZG9CGA2uMQMIsAqoSu+ZPY4Eo0ZfYsu4XEyR8bCRmrf/J CFIuIiAk0dqjBDFeVuLXnb0sExhlZyGF4ixEKEKY6hJTpuSCVDADg+TJuwusELaaxMLfi5iQ xRcwsq1iFMpNzMzRzcwz10ssKMhJ1UvOz93ECIr76XZiOxgfrrI6xCjAwajEw3sh3T5aiDWx rLgy9xCjNAeLkjjv2o9AIYH0xJLU7NTUgtSi+KLSnNTiQ4xMHJxSDYzSDn7djikqMp3creeM deLF7bM/+VgvYZnvfcnzUfOvFPN5+mw1z34zf5/55PDmBXdkeTYuLWfPimcLMLfes4pr/9R3 RV8XXEpco3FbNXFxa5O8R9yqWddPMfjMWb3l603NmU8eF57OSsu+6bt9r+pFvdPzbqZOWRK5 P3DfdZ/PByxN2o//4tioxFKckWioxVxUnAgAlGNkh9wCAAA= Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Opinions wanted: Babel over DTLS ports X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2018 16:54:59 -0000 --Boundary_(ID_v8zEUNyKdOVRQnJjN156DQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Hi everyone, One of the Babel over DTLS questions we haven't answered yet is UDP port num= bers. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01#section-3 We have two options: 1) run Babel over DTLS on the same port as regular Babel This means all Babel over DTLS packets use UDP source and destination ports b= oth equal to 6696. Implementations need to differentiate between regular Babel and DTLS on rece= ption. The downside is that it significantly increases implementation complexity wh= en your TLS stack creates its own sockets. Additionally, this complicates the DTLS stack as it now needs to handle mult= iple concurrent connections on the same five-tuple, which is something most DTLS stacks do not support today (RFC 6347 section 4= .2.8). 2) run Babel over DTLS on a separate port This means regular Babel packets are sent on 6696 and DTLS is run as a serve= r on a new port and as client on ephemeral ports. This simplifies parsing since the UDP port dictates how to parse the packet.= This would match how HNCP works. The downside is that it would require administrators that have firewall rule= s that allow 6696 to also open the new port. Do people have opinions one way or the other? I=E2=80=99ll be presenting this question in Montreal as well. Thanks, David= --Boundary_(ID_v8zEUNyKdOVRQnJjN156DQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Hi everyone,

=
One of the Babel over DTLS questions we haven't answered yet is UDP port= numbers.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01#section-3=

We have two options:

=
1) run Babel over DTLS on the same port as regular Babel
This means all Babel over DTLS packets use UDP s= ource and destination ports both equal to 6696.
= Implementations ne= ed to differentiate between regular Babel and DTLS on reception.
T= he downside is that it significantly increases implementation complexity whe= n your TLS stack creates its own sockets.
Additionally, this compli= cates the DTLS stack as it now needs to handle multiple concurrent connectio= ns on the same five-tuple,
which is something most DTLS stacks do n= ot support today (RFC 6347 section 4.2.8).

<= /div>
2) run Babel over DTLS on a separate port

This means regular Babel packets are sent on 6696 and DTLS is run as a s= erver on a new port and as client on ephemeral ports.
This simplif= ies parsing since the UDP port dictates how to parse the packet.
T= his would match how HNCP works.
The downside is that it would requ= ire administrators that have firewall rules that allow 6696 to also open the= new port.

Do people have opinions one w= ay or the other?

I=E2=80=99ll be presenting this qu= estion in Montreal as well.

Thanks,
David
= --Boundary_(ID_v8zEUNyKdOVRQnJjN156DQ)-- From nobody Sat Jul 7 10:46:16 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB5A9130E35 for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 10:46:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 bucsVEDmVrc1 for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 10:46:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x22a.google.com (mail-io0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AA21130E0E for ; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 10:46:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id v26-v6so13587188iog.5 for ; Sat, 07 Jul 2018 10:46:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9jb1SAGZgg7SBLvgB46mKgsxVZwZ8x3o2Wm13X9ULXk=; b=z/TY/zX+AUMi6xAEtGELpmUbAJyLd/NZwphuubTCWW/qZMw9MoyT4eXdP0yJOZfvDV +HvkhTUFtB0PpkuCu7piUsodxoNHbk5ofQacfuZtmSHuCS8I2IsPDb8aiELgEWOqzRFD ynEWAfxW8FzQRbSrs4e2chXTXUl94+PeCeZRovrD+e5YJ9RZKTmkDJN8auSvBVPKudJF 6br55OMhi7iHjFXLiQWfWp6IwM5LHWIpMB00Yd/b4BJjMozFvVwkOhFrr8i/QnjMBBzN A4euj+LsfQKRvwXHVdQnYvRGpXQnihb8jfiT8gkhkeZMzRBXFijbPe3Cf+hB8Pyez6ds 3KaA== 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=9jb1SAGZgg7SBLvgB46mKgsxVZwZ8x3o2Wm13X9ULXk=; b=hWjxiWr6t7HXVD/e3fwTVnzT44Qjh/ADYBwa7Q6deA2/+v59WjLR9k8vnEG0JBtE3e XQuI8gV4zYtfGORS4v2pUikKDf+DiFHGUnvH2Njx30A5OzZU8IcFWc2RjhfHQbplvINK +PoDBJBE8r/jCKS5UbuIuUBXBLrMROfW6asMR7VI5f7ED+6ggHU3r0ArtrhHUlOuDkig MS1HYmvR68o0Bqg3uMl975F6TU47hn2NF+019qz6KJLtaqtD/Ivv80CjIR0eltiLCbKQ 9j7P2KJKlb+bju7je+Biht3z9ewtcgiYjRu1eFOam83g/sxueU9eojv4mnWh1U+2NsG3 C5GA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFxCy5ixHRObJhKVLf4PL64Dm83if3qt38ZVLJg/uN/M8WW9IJk GXi86NLmUrhoHwjLeeuEXom66RPyJskbT3nBjRe2Vg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpd228+PyFK1Zlz4F5lzL/WCdpruIptp1EWL1s4sALLLh/VeFPRcdcu1kPoLOiQKSJ3S3eQpYO0sufStoWZSOO4= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:b387:: with SMTP id c129-v6mr12791983iof.32.1530985570614; Sat, 07 Jul 2018 10:46:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a4f:5f86:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Jul 2018 10:45:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> References: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> From: Ted Lemon Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2018 13:45:30 -0400 Message-ID: To: David Schinazi Cc: Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000017d42505706c5bb7" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Opinions wanted: Babel over DTLS ports X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2018 17:46:14 -0000 --00000000000017d42505706c5bb7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think the firewall issue isn't important because there shouldn't be a firewall within a babel routing domain; if there is, the extra work of managing the holes punched for Babel isn't too bad. It would be nice if people started implementing PCP anyway. On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 12:54 PM, David Schinazi wrote= : > Hi everyone, > > One of the Babel over DTLS questions we haven't answered yet is UDP port > numbers. > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01#section-3 > > We have two options: > > 1) run Babel over DTLS on the same port as regular Babel > > This means all Babel over DTLS packets use UDP source and destination > ports both equal to 6696. > Implementations need to differentiate between regular Babel and DTLS on > reception. > The downside is that it significantly increases implementation complexity > when your TLS stack creates its own sockets. > Additionally, this complicates the DTLS stack as it now needs to handle > multiple concurrent connections on the same five-tuple, > which is something most DTLS stacks do not support today (RFC 6347 sectio= n > 4.2.8). > > 2) run Babel over DTLS on a separate port > > This means regular Babel packets are sent on 6696 and DTLS is run as a > server on a new port and as client on ephemeral ports. > This simplifies parsing since the UDP port dictates how to parse the > packet. > This would match how HNCP works. > The downside is that it would require administrators that have firewall > rules that allow 6696 to also open the new port. > > Do people have opinions one way or the other? > > I=E2=80=99ll be presenting this question in Montreal as well. > > Thanks, > David > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > > --00000000000017d42505706c5bb7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think the firewall issue isn't important because the= re shouldn't be a firewall within a babel routing domain; if there is, = the extra work of managing the holes punched for Babel isn't too bad. = =C2=A0 It would be nice if people started implementing PCP anyway.

On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 = at 12:54 PM, David Schinazi <dschinazi@apple.com> wrote:
Hi everyone,

One of the Babel over DTLS questi= ons we haven't answered yet is UDP port numbers.

We have two options:

1) run Babel over DTLS on the same port as regu= lar Babel

This means all Babel over DTLS packets use UDP source and destination = ports both equal to 6696.
Implementations need to differentiate between regular = Babel and DTLS on reception.
The downside is that it significantly increases imp= lementation complexity when your TLS stack creates its own sockets.<= /div>
Additionally= , this complicates the DTLS stack as it now needs to handle multiple concur= rent connections on the same five-tuple,
which is something most DTLS stacks do = not support today (RFC 6347 section 4.2.8).

2) run Babel over DTLS on a separate= port

This means regular Babel packets are sent on 6696 and DTLS is run as a ser= ver on a new port and as client on ephemeral ports.
This simplifies parsing sinc= e the UDP port dictates how to parse the packet.
This would match how HNCP works= .
The= downside is that it would require administrators that have firewall rules = that allow 6696 to also open the new port.

Do people have opinions one way or th= e other?

I=E2=80=99ll be presenting this question in Montreal as well.

Thanks,=
David

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


--00000000000017d42505706c5bb7-- From nobody Wed Jul 11 15:35:16 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3489412872C for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 15:35:14 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 eKW6E3QgKwGz for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 15:35:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D59DF1274D0 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 15:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6BMYNbh013960 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:34:23 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6BMYaug004428; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:34:36 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B304EB200; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:35:05 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id T_7V0UCrxSt1; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:35:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 78821EB279; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:35:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:35:01 +0200 Message-ID: <87muuxxuy2.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: David Schinazi Cc: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> References: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:34:23 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:34:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4685EF.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B4685FC.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4685EF.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4685FC.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4685EF.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4685FC.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Opinions wanted: Babel over DTLS ports X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 22:35:15 -0000 > One of the Babel over DTLS questions we haven't answered yet is UDP port > numbers. > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01#section-3 I think that implementation complexity is about the same. Using different ports requires opening an extra socket, but that's a small cost (just a slight complication to your main event loop, and slightly more complex error handling in case one of the binds fails). It might be slightly easier to hook your DTLS library if you use a different port, but we haven't found that to be a significant problem. Using different ports might cause packet reordering (since you're using different sockets). That is not likely to be a big deal, since we only send Hellos and IHUs on the unencrypted socket, and since Babel is fairly resistant to packet reordering. It might cause trouble with extensions that are sensitive to packet reordering -- for now, HMAC is the only such extension. I have a slight preference for using a single port. David prefers the two port solution, I believe, since he wants to hook as high up as possible into his DTLS library. Antonin would appear to agree with David, but he's afraid to tell me clearly ;-) I think the policy of listening to people with an implementation more than people without one has served us well. David, what's the state of your implementation? -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Jul 11 16:05:16 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EBA2130ECC for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:05:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 eu-p9dp6n9oX for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in23.apple.com (mail-out23.apple.com [17.171.2.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25C92130E5D for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:05:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1531350311; x=2395263911; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=KT8RAn3lQtFV3HdTRLInK9f2afpTqDAT6Qf0YQRyYXs=; b=MlcZ9ZepYIJsEPt6Najl0GSKLxWYIdekM2GYhR7U4NBrsrIwXAxS/DFq/PIxEmgJ FFYE5/iCiAE4fU7plYMvu6Tp3M4gRVTWZspeJ+9xCLX3SWOiS3GJdS5upvm8y3Ys wP0krzxWJ3TfaJDh58vc5BIDErEsb1kssHPa3DbAQ4rxrbqwqTialnLB5BZ3H3m/ OOfE8Emi5Bl7oNXJhyiVN+U+D06p7Bi+QDtfj7crJFWnwIsMzLje0pWo308L0ta/ 2A9bX1idjOCCUi7hmF3nEhdxo/gepc3NubBBYXgXysdIE+lYBzFHZdfMpyky6VlA eiqKBkJcZ0Sw6odJXgs/CA==; Received: from relay2.euro.apple.com (relay2.euro.apple.com [17.66.55.12]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in23.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 54.E8.16016.62D864B5; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:05:11 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 11ab0217-d0fff70000003e90-52-5b468d262ddc Received: from crk-mmpp-sz03.euro.apple.com ( [17.66.12.165]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay2.euro.apple.com (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 17.FE.00572.52D864B5; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:05:09 +0100 (BST) Received: from [17.192.155.180] by crk-mmpp-sz03.euro.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PBQ00FQA5GG0R00@crk-mmpp-sz03.euro.apple.com>; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:05:09 +0100 (IST) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi Message-id: Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6FA91BEE-7719-4AC4-BC7C-F739766F272C" MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:05:04 -0700 In-reply-to: <87muuxxuy2.wl-jch@irif.fr> Cc: babel@ietf.org To: Juliusz Chroboczek References: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> <87muuxxuy2.wl-jch@irif.fr> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrELMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi6GTOo6ve6xZtsLxb0mLLom4Wi/mty9gc mDyWLPnJ5LF4y1vGAKYoLpuU1JzMstQifbsErox1x16xF6yzrjjxlqOBsd2oi5GTQ0LAROLx pjvsXYxcHEICW5gkvq26zgSTmN9zjg0isYJJ4t76+1BOA5PEybYL7CBVwgLSEl0X7rJ2MXJw sAloSRxYAzaVV8BGYn3bbGYQm1kgSeL0md3sEHFjifWbF7JCtFpLnDj9DKyGRUBVYvKSFrAx nAIaEjseFUC0CkmcuTaDBcQWEVCRWD7tGdgYIYEoieX3J0DdqSjRv+YQ2GkSAjPYJHYu+cg+ gVFoFpLVs5CshohrSyxb+Jp5FtA6ZgEdickLGVGFIeyP548wLWBkW8UonJuYmaObmWdkrJdY UJCTqpecn7uJERQJq5nEdzB+fm14iFGAg1GJh3cDh1u0EGtiWXFl7iFGaQ4WJXHeD7vEooUE 0hNLUrNTUwtSi+KLSnNSiw8xMnFwSjUwxnn+OX3ouOc9bzHRsq9S7o4ePzfsfn3k040Ljya/ WKlhGDqNNftIaTuX52rmbYve6Cf3PlM8WnmzMC/c/9yv+sMPBS0cY88uPbd+reSGOvnmxY+f N25Tmz7x6FMVuauPsu98vnRt8Y9UwUyGGP36+Z8THn8r8wxZX3jocfeOUxeCct+a3Ojjt1di Kc5INNRiLipOBAD+nqC7ZQIAAA== X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrJLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi6MSzVFe11y3a4PgPXYsti7pZLOa3LmNz YPJYsuQnk8fiLW8ZA5iiuGxSUnMyy1KL9O0SuDLWHXvFXrDOuuLEW44GxnajLkZODgkBE4n5 PefYuhi5OIQEVjBJ3Ft/H8ppYJI42XaBHaRKWEBaouvCXdYuRg4ONgEtiQNrwJp5BWwk1rfN ZgaxmQWSJE6f2c0OETeWWL95IStEq7XEidPPwGpYBFQlJi9pARvDKaAhseNRAUSrkMSZazNY QGwRARWJ5dOegY0REoiSWH5/AhPEnYoS/WsOsU1g5J+FZNssJNsg4toSyxa+Zp4FtIFZQEdi 8kJGVGEI++P5I0wLGNlWMYoWpeYkVhrppZYW5eslFhTkpOol5+duYgQHsDnPDsZXBw0PMQpw MCrx8HqUukULsSaWFVfmHmKU4GBWEuE1m+4SLcSbklhZlVqUH19UmpNafIhRmoNFSZx3shJz tJBAemJJanZqakFqEUyWiYNTqoGxLIhv/1vh2hvnfsUxbVc5sDL1+y2GdP9HSwqMi1U55/8t LJ53R+tjAIPrjasiK6okbz1m6mBZUGpxtS2DzSpD4oCtzK1D/xgV/f5d1PZaYavGO0Wiqj1x yyanabrvmI5ztn5/zZaVMVPDKvWN1pm7Kw0XTHghPMPk/If+jGu3lH9sTVtf8vWWEktxRqKh FnNRcSIAjCZDbFwCAAA= Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Opinions wanted: Babel over DTLS ports X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 23:05:15 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_6FA91BEE-7719-4AC4-BC7C-F739766F272C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > On Jul 11, 2018, at 15:35, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >=20 >> One of the Babel over DTLS questions we haven't answered yet is UDP = port >> numbers. >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01#section-3 >=20 > I think that implementation complexity is about the same. Using = different > ports requires opening an extra socket, but that's a small cost (just > a slight complication to your main event loop, and slightly more = complex > error handling in case one of the binds fails). It might be slightly > easier to hook your DTLS library if you use a different port, but we > haven't found that to be a significant problem. >=20 > Using different ports might cause packet reordering (since you're = using > different sockets). That is not likely to be a big deal, since we = only > send Hellos and IHUs on the unencrypted socket, and since Babel is = fairly > resistant to packet reordering. It might cause trouble with = extensions > that are sensitive to packet reordering -- for now, HMAC is the only = such > extension. If I understand you correctly, this would only cause packet reordering between multicast and unicast (as in all unicast is ordered, and all multicast is ordered, but multicast 1 might arrive after unicast 2). For HMAC specifically, this could be solved by using a different index for unicast and multicast - but that would require receivers to keep track of multiple indices. And that complexity's probably not worth it because you don't need HMAC over DTLS. I agree that this is a valid concern though - but it doesn't tip the = scales for me. > I have a slight preference for using a single port. David prefers the = two > port solution, I believe, since he wants to hook as high up as = possible > into his DTLS library. Antonin would appear to agree with David, but = he's > afraid to tell me clearly ;-) >=20 > I think the policy of listening to people with an implementation more = than > people without one has served us well. David, what's the state of = your > implementation? Our DTLS stack [1] only lets you handle DTLS above the abstraction of a connection - you don't want to be messing with sockets. In order to get the same port variant to work, I had to write 400 lines of Obj-C = that create UDP sockets over loopback so I can pull the encrypted packets out from under the DTLS stack. Needless to say that's not an ideal = solution. And on the topic of implementation, have you modified the DTLS stack you use to support multiple concurrent connections on the same port yet? Last time we talked your implementation was trivially DoSable by sending bad DTLS client hellos. [1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/network = David= --Apple-Mail=_6FA91BEE-7719-4AC4-BC7C-F739766F272C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

On Jul 11, 2018, at 15:35, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> = wrote:

One of the Babel over = DTLS questions we haven't answered yet is UDP port
numbers.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-decimo-babel-dtls-01#section-= 3

I think that = implementation complexity is about the same.  Using different
ports requires opening an extra socket, but that's a small = cost (just
a slight complication to your main event loop, = and slightly more complex
error handling in case one of = the binds fails).  It might be slightly
easier to = hook your DTLS library if you use a different port, but we
haven't found that to be a significant problem.

Using different ports might cause packet = reordering (since you're using
different sockets). =  That is not likely to be a big deal, since we only
send Hellos and IHUs on the unencrypted socket, and since = Babel is fairly
resistant to packet reordering.  It = might cause trouble with extensions
that are sensitive to = packet reordering -- for now, HMAC is the only such
extension.

If I understand you correctly, this would only = cause packet reordering
between multicast and unicast (as in = all unicast is ordered, and all
multicast is ordered, but = multicast 1 might arrive after unicast 2).

For HMAC specifically, this could be solved by = using a different index
for unicast and multicast - but that = would require receivers to keep
track of multiple indices. And = that complexity's probably not worth it
because you don't need = HMAC over DTLS.

I agree that this is = a valid concern though - but it doesn't tip the scales for me.

I have a slight preference for using a single port. =  David prefers the two
port solution, I believe, = since he wants to hook as high up as possible
into his = DTLS library.  Antonin would appear to agree with David, but = he's
afraid to tell me clearly ;-)

I think the policy of listening to people with an = implementation more than
people without one has served us = well.  David, what's the state of your
implementation?
Our DTLS stack [1] only lets you handle DTLS = above the abstraction of
a connection - you don't want to be = messing with sockets. In order to
get the same port variant to = work, I had to write 400 lines of Obj-C that
create UDP = sockets over loopback so I can pull the encrypted packets
out = from under the DTLS stack. Needless to say that's not an ideal = solution.

And on the topic of = implementation, have you modified the DTLS stack
you use to = support multiple concurrent connections on the same port = yet?
Last time we talked your implementation was trivially = DoSable by sending
bad DTLS client hellos.

[1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/network

David
= --Apple-Mail=_6FA91BEE-7719-4AC4-BC7C-F739766F272C-- From nobody Wed Jul 11 16:45:49 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFA84130E73 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:45:47 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 laJkyct077pT for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1831124BE5 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:45:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6BNixWM027928 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:44:59 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6BNjCDn015950; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:45:12 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C296EB914; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:45:41 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id bG2CRAxOCenV; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:45:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E571EB913; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:45:37 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:45:37 +0200 Message-ID: <87k1q1xroe.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: David Schinazi CC: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> <87muuxxuy2.wl-jch@irif.fr> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:44:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Thu, 12 Jul 2018 01:45:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B46967B.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B469688.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B46967B.003 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B469688.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B46967B.003 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B469688.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Opinions wanted: Babel over DTLS ports X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 23:45:48 -0000 > David, what's the state of your implementation? Are you saying you've implemented both variants already? If so, that gives you 100XP, double damage when using a melee weapon, and slightly faster recovery of mana. > Our DTLS stack [1] only lets you handle DTLS above the abstraction of > a connection - you don't want to be messing with sockets. In order to > get the same port variant to work, I had to write 400 lines of Obj-C that > create UDP sockets over loopback so I can pull the encrypted packets > out from under the DTLS stack. Needless to say that's not an ideal solution. I sympathise, that's pretty nasty. I'd argue it's a limitation of the DTLS stack, though, and one that will come back to bite you in the future. Say, when somebody wants to use DTLS over DCCP, or use DTLS with UDP-Lite and only protect part of the packet. I think you should go explain the issue to your DTLS guys, and see what they say. > And on the topic of implementation, have you modified the DTLS stack you > use to support multiple concurrent connections on the same port yet? I don't think it requires any changes to the DTLS stack, but I agree that that needs checking. -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Jul 11 17:22:56 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C850130F0B for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 17:22:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 uSfQDc4FO6Kx for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 17:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x22b.google.com (mail-qt0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82FB4130EAE for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 17:22:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id h4-v6so22712677qtj.7 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 17:22:50 -0700 (PDT) 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=OcGJRVRrUzXBzOuto9dFjScGb3g2V4WwOP7vdwhhAbk=; b=iOHEu27gS3iQvRzWV9n2Du3c70bisQwbccErsuyVEIm+F1lLkzuXcLfW7g5aPaRdLm REtK77zXJbvKx7OmngGBMcr46k3P3NTb6UUXVe3U4EbZFvC0OeiWHVE7Ovhyib1Fw80b OusLa87r0O89LBA81nhRrUS0JtPCh7IAcSw+oirEOBB6uIgRFZQreB3Ot2cl0WJFA/y9 L6AOdTC71mt1E09eXmP+EQhbt1TSdpjlOBm3BqSOWvSIyscmQkGN/GnrsdNWYpby+zxN yqD7/c2G1ATMvJhIU9DgQOsZLbTYCXdaocoGyRVUCt0Pr/XZeMBYXvU3eYVlYgc7rfYU /H8g== 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=OcGJRVRrUzXBzOuto9dFjScGb3g2V4WwOP7vdwhhAbk=; b=uB8YCraebzM0L+A82EWVn+wZfEPBI0JUbCLciN2I4QbhZLO6A1dVUn6mSLWX3gTHwd oiu4qbigFkwKlvjl7zsheOXIut1h7fiRYT6Wg+WNYizmSezjK09RvQr2SlI8xe5m71PI vCayM1aPLgslL8eV6tUJbRIUZRi57AEbUidI2S54PLV6dSGiNLcOx1yb4syHWr5aEwcR LPAvVi6x20DSJ4x0Ccjyctu7NWr9CtzcHpflcrO3m42YfK6LfH/c05sfFiAy+L/6N4hF 7jUZJNEYTyRkAo7W1dWpzQEB3qMYS7917bHPefJw9jyArZbeBm8QMhf2dGrGmjkAK9eX kd1g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGNcWuIzy1bWx2oKnztTmaVMQhRmxNP5gBFoI4ppynRQ+j2ktGx ubDWwE7ZlMfFY3ElOGytfxNXVppmAczzpmrD9G4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcq01kxPEcGzmpAOT7VWvPemKkNz6eYmCKgeqoV5ck12riP/YJuXZkY/EzrIICzxb5bAtnQY1fUugAylx7iRsc= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:354e:: with SMTP id z14-v6mr24559qtb.261.1531354969634; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 17:22:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3C99142B-734D-44C8-AD96-02A0859E59F8@apple.com> <87muuxxuy2.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87k1q1xroe.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <87k1q1xroe.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Dave Taht Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 14:21:07 -1000 Message-ID: To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: David Schinazi , Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fd7c2d0570c25cb1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Opinions wanted: Babel over DTLS ports X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 00:22:54 -0000 --000000000000fd7c2d0570c25cb1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Just as a side note, I used to make test versions of babel run over udplite. That way it shared the same port number and it was obvious what routers were running the newer code. Udplite seems rarely disabled, in the Linux world at least, one line to firewall, and... a lot easier than getting another port number out of iana. On Wed, Jul 11, 2018, 1:45 PM Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > > David, what's the state of your implementation? > > Are you saying you've implemented both variants already? If so, that > gives you 100XP, double damage when using a melee weapon, and slightly > faster recovery of mana. > > > Our DTLS stack [1] only lets you handle DTLS above the abstraction of > > a connection - you don't want to be messing with sockets. In order to > > get the same port variant to work, I had to write 400 lines of Obj-C that > > create UDP sockets over loopback so I can pull the encrypted packets > > out from under the DTLS stack. Needless to say that's not an ideal > solution. > > I sympathise, that's pretty nasty. I'd argue it's a limitation of the > DTLS stack, though, and one that will come back to bite you in the future. > Say, when somebody wants to use DTLS over DCCP, or use DTLS with UDP-Lite > and only protect part of the packet. > > I think you should go explain the issue to your DTLS guys, and see what > they say. > > > And on the topic of implementation, have you modified the DTLS stack you > > use to support multiple concurrent connections on the same port yet? > > I don't think it requires any changes to the DTLS stack, but I agree that > that needs checking. > > -- Juliusz > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --000000000000fd7c2d0570c25cb1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just as a side note, I used to make test versions of babe= l run over udplite. That way it shared the same port number and it was obvi= ous what routers were running the newer code. Udplite seems rarely disabled= , in the Linux world at least, one line to firewall, and... a lot easier th= an getting another port number out of iana.

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018, 1:45 PM Juliusz Chroboczek <= jch@irif.fr> wrote:
> David, what's the state of your implementat= ion?

Are you saying you've implemented both variants already?=C2=A0 If so, t= hat
gives you 100XP, double damage when using a melee weapon, and slightly
faster recovery of mana.

> Our DTLS stack [1] only lets you handle DTLS above the abstraction of<= br> > a connection - you don't want to be messing with sockets. In order= to
> get the same port variant to work, I had to write 400 lines of Obj-C t= hat
> create UDP sockets over loopback so I can pull the encrypted packets > out from under the DTLS stack. Needless to say that's not an ideal= solution.

I sympathise, that's pretty nasty.=C2=A0 I'd argue it's a limit= ation of the
DTLS stack, though, and one that will come back to bite you in the future.<= br> Say, when somebody wants to use DTLS over DCCP, or use DTLS with UDP-Lite and only protect part of the packet.

I think you should go explain the issue to your DTLS guys, and see what
they say.

> And on the topic of implementation, have you modified the DTLS stack y= ou
> use to support multiple concurrent connections on the same port yet?
I don't think it requires any changes to the DTLS stack, but I agree th= at
that needs checking.

-- Juliusz

_______________________________________________
babel mailing list
babe= l@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel
--000000000000fd7c2d0570c25cb1-- From nobody Fri Jul 13 09:17:09 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89B00130EFB for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:16:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 hwyH8ZxSHVJy for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 876B7130F01 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:16:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1531498608; bh=YjhqqFb+CBgvCTnb1tf+r1aBlztk1DajqbZL7xIBKv4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=qtRbLwbmv6EAzbQsmR4Fewl5NeTBH7LHnh1S7tx8SRp+CGaUolP7SODcNrm7BPwme Qe/jaXrLZ5PFB70n3ti7cWwXJu0EFdFak+MfCZiasw/rj1+OVm9hUzx+PiymkXBlOt dYmY/YaPVqjl++eHGhLdPsSogEE0udAh8Z+Zkx2uC/ezMxMO6GEoq7ltnMoT/wMHfo IX/yz3cs4NvyO4iYsmg/4ag3LBeQtHMcm8Axt36LcV32UNpure2T7fuwcOWZRPyzuP yZo42suqVA1GAuUBxGwNpEMzuh6DU5+Vpqss68TPYP74Bv0TZeAvamCX8eJ1HCX9QM ivli4GrIXHGJg== To: babel@ietf.org Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 18:16:43 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87efg79klw.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: [babel] HMAC for Babel in Bird X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 16:17:07 -0000 Hey everyone I have just finished my proof of concept implementation of HMAC for Babel as specified in draft-do-babel-hmac-00. The result is in the 'babel-hmac' branch of this git repository: https://github.com/tohojo/bird The implementation uses the existing HMAC libraries in Bird, and so supports MD5, SHA-1, SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384 and SHA-512 as hashing algorithms; it will default to SHA256 as specified in the draft. I have verified that the implementation can exchange HMAC-signed packets with the HMAC-enabled babeld branch that Juliusz announced earlier. To do this, it needs to be configured with a SHA-1 key, and the babeld implementation needs to be fixed to use the pseudo-header format specified in the draft (it currently switches the source and destination addresses in the pseudo-header). An example config for Bird to achieve this is (only the protocol config): protocol babel { interface "veth0" { authentication hmac; # babeld insists that an HMAC key must be 20 bytes long; the HEX # equivalent (to be used in the babeld config) for this key is # 7465737474657374746573747465737474657374 password "testtesttesttesttest" { algorithm hmac sha1; }; }; } I'll post some comments on the draft in the other thread discussing outstanding issues. -Toke From nobody Fri Jul 13 09:30:38 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 281F7130E59 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:30:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 UxRN2O06G0yr for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:30:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56AE1130E01 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:30:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1531499431; bh=7WNVVvKCMPGs9gg5+nBCQMIecYxMS7hcQAEOTr1bKmI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=u47ewNoqhmoRbsDz/1v6r9mGPfsILvmt1Y+CVGvJMjnD4zzgEZele9ksv947301KZ mCtdydtoZysJZrrI+Jp8go2MQYfnXJLnGy0e5n+F7OYxDNF5CT5B5J3Ql8GRoj9Vq0 2heZ62Wo1B6us5K1nQntlxbEiyBdfdtwGgV0AROP8JN57SKEfNbKCN0JlK43aOjmIZ uJxXFtlXOJuo0IJ+gPUffTs9IMjLlcZu5FOR7wWPE+Cj7W/2eAr6ffQbdNsdmO9Rj0 V+vQ0tCZ9TQ8KezVX/a8R6V6aiRqMtf68i4cb2C6cphhLw1zvveQGk9+32IodQOu1p jjIfbUusu0lJg== To: Juliusz Chroboczek , babel@ietf.org Cc: Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= In-Reply-To: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 18:30:31 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 16:30:36 -0000 Seeing as I have now implemented the draft, I have some more opinions on this now: > 2. Should the HMAC cover the packet header? > > The Babel packet header has the following format: > > 0 1 2 3 > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Magic | Version | Body length | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > > Right now, Version is fixed at 2, but if we ever define Babel version 3, > we might become susceptible to downgrade attacks. I don't recall why we > skipped the header in HMAC computation, but I think it's a bug. > > (As far as I can tell, 7298bis hashes the whole packet, including the > packet trailer.) Yes, I see now reason not to hash the whole thing. > 5. Use of the packet trailer > > The HMAC TLV is carried in the packet trailer, which makes it clear which > part of the packet is protected by HMAC and avoids the need to clear parts > of the packet body before hashing. (Think about extensibility -- there > might be other TLVs in the future that must not be protected, and if > different extensions require clearing different parts of the packet, we're > going to end up with some pretty enjoyable code obfuscation.) > > Does anyone have technical arguments against the use of the packet > trailer? For the record, Denis didn't use a packet trailer, and David has > expressed some mild reservations about its use (he feels that we're > trading specification simplicity for implementation simplicity and > extensibility, and while I agree with this, I happen to think it's the > right tradeoff in this particular case). > > If we keep the trailer, well need to add something to 6126bis. I suggest > the following RFCese: > > - the packet trailer is a sequence of TLVs, just like the packet body, > and the TLV number space is the same; > - a TLV that appears in the packet trailer MUST be ignored on reception > unless its definition explicitly states that it is allowed in the > packet trailer; > - the mandatory bit MUST NOT be acted upon when it appears in the packet > trailer; as a consequence, an implementation that doesn't grok any > TLVs that can appear in the trailer MAY simply ignore the packet > trailer without ever parsing it. I agree that sticking the signatures in the packet trailer is the right thing to do. The zero out / hash self / rewrite hash dance is way too annoying. Also, when the signature is in the packet trailer the hash check can move straight to that and ignore the rest of the packet; and the regular parser can ignore the packet trailer and just parse the regular TLVs. > 8. Index and Nonce size > > Indices and Nonces are of variable size (up to the maximum TLV size): our > implementation selects 80-bit values, but it will handle values of up to > 251 resp. 255 octets (as much as fits in a TLV). > > While having variable-length values slightly complicates the implementation, > I think it's a good idea: > > - an implementation might want to encode a cookie in the Nonce in order > to have stronger DoS protection, thus needing a larger Nonce; > - an implementation with a stable clock might want to use a tiny Index > (see point 5 above). > > I suggest we should limit indices and nonces to 192 octets, indices and > nonces larger than that MUST NOT be sent. This gives enough margin to > carry a nonce or index in a sub-TLV (which we're not currently planning to > do, but what the heck). Letting the nonce be of arbitrary size is fine, but doing the same thing for the index is incredibly annoying. Since the index needs to be stored with the same lifetime as the neighbour, making it arbitrary size means there's another blob of dynamically assigned memory to keep track of. Which may have to be resized later if the peer changes its index size. If we want to allow really small indexes, that is fine, but then limit the max size to (say) 10 bytes; that way, a buffer of the maximum size can be statically assigned in the neighbour struct (251 or even 192 bytes is way too much for static allocation). Or maybe just forgo the complexity entirely and make the index a fixed size; you just know that someone is going to pick a way too small value and make themselves susceptible to replay attacks at some point... -Toke From nobody Fri Jul 13 15:14:28 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 821D9130F4F for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 15:14:27 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 qWGFo500RkTY for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 15:14:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40A89126CB6 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 15:14:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6DMDdwV027291 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:13:39 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6DMDq0c004836; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:13:52 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B07EB200; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:14:21 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 5-yZJYdmfUuI; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:14:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15D99EB22E; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:14:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:14:19 +0200 Message-ID: <87fu0mn5qc.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <87efg79klw.fsf@toke.dk> References: <87efg79klw.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:13:39 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sat, 14 Jul 2018 00:13:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B492413.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B492420.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B492413.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B492420.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B492413.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B492420.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] HMAC for Babel in Bird X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 22:14:27 -0000 > I have just finished my proof of concept implementation of HMAC for > Babel as specified in draft-do-babel-hmac-00. Congratulations, Toke! And thanks a lot. (More comments to follow once I've spoken with the ladies.) -- Juliusz From nobody Sat Jul 14 17:08:20 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3968130E29 for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 17:08:18 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 bhF3JknUBibY for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 17:08:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C40C130DDD for ; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 17:08:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6F07WSQ015518; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:07:32 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D150CEB22D; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:08:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id UF4EWU-xwpWQ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:08:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 978A7EB200; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:08:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:08:12 +0200 Message-ID: <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: babel@ietf.org, Weronika =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Ko=B3odziejak?= , Clara =?ISO-8859-1?Q?D=F4?= In-Reply-To: <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:07:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4A9044.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4A9044.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4A9044.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 00:08:19 -0000 >> 2. Should the HMAC cover the packet header? > Yes, I see now reason not to hash the whole thing. Fully agreed. That's what draft-do-...-00 says, and what we've implemented (not very well, by the way). >> 5. Use of the packet trailer > I agree that sticking the signatures in the packet trailer is the right > thing to do. The zero out / hash self / rewrite hash dance is way too > annoying. Also, when the signature is in the packet trailer the hash > check can move straight to that and ignore the rest of the packet; and > the regular parser can ignore the packet trailer and just parse the > regular TLVs. That's what I think too, but David disagreed last time I asked him. Since you agree with me, I think I'm going to insist on this one. (I assume your implementation correctly drops all non-HMAC TLVs from the packet trailer, including PAD1.) >> 8. Index and Nonce size > Letting the nonce be of arbitrary size is fine, but doing the same thing > for the index is incredibly annoying. Since the index needs to be stored > with the same lifetime as the neighbour, making it arbitrary size means > there's another blob of dynamically assigned memory to keep track of. > Which may have to be resized later if the peer changes its index size. I think we have some time to decide, but here's a few arguments both ways. 1. We really want nonces to be of arbitrary size, so implementations have the space to encode a cookie if they're concerned about DoS. 2. Having nonces of arbitrary size implies dynamic allocation. At any rate, you need dynamic allocation for nonces, since they're short-lived and per-neighbour. 3. You do want to allow tiny indices (unless we adopt Markus' proposal), since some implementations will want to save bytes on the wire by using a real-time clock. 4. I don't see any good reason right now for long indices (more than 16 bytes, say). So right now (likely to change in the future), I'd argue for: - variable size nonces with no size limit; - variable size indices. I haven't made an opinion yet on whether we want a limit to the size of indices. > If we want to allow really small indexes, that is fine, but then limit > the max size to (say) 10 bytes; that way, a buffer of the maximum size > can be statically assigned in the neighbour struct (251 or even 192 > bytes is way too much for static allocation). Agreed. > Or maybe just forgo the complexity entirely and make the index a fixed > size; you just know that someone is going to pick a way too small value > and make themselves susceptible to replay attacks at some point... Disagreed. -- Juliusz From nobody Sun Jul 15 02:58:12 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD936130E11 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:58:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 aQyEOPHUYwlR for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:58:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31E2F126F72 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 02:58:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1531648682; bh=DOYaDyk1nkWIehdy2hM5rucgavijRSjRGf2IbrJ8GaE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=y0Tb1R3Cqsa7RDRJu6+TcgOhD+Wd2diK7fX12XY8pogMyA+D4CG0jpARIYvTlbOVO sAar6REJIpNN3pzXraThma/o4ZY/82v7DDZfNBiJoFhjC3CxauB+OuOuwkRpphsJtq xLyS/PzBxTsuFtd6GxDGNODZJTu+idtUZ8/cOziaa4Uw81pohi1Dcqkx4pDqe0gG0Q YpOnwaNwnJKeZE0llEKD0U0hWDk82NWQPmeT8wB64BuN85z2RJ6h6uSTv57+qZnydG oPjLPg7WJVN4+7mS/qM+PQigOgkvHN1AxyjVhRTY5xK6TdYL2+J5kEGvsjaJ6jUpRg V+/n5SQRdodtQ== To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: babel@ietf.org, Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= In-Reply-To: <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 11:57:59 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87r2k495y0.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 09:58:10 -0000 Juliusz Chroboczek writes: >>> 2. Should the HMAC cover the packet header? > >> Yes, I see no reason not to hash the whole thing. > > Fully agreed. That's what draft-do-...-00 says, and what we've > implemented (not very well, by the way). Cool. >>> 5. Use of the packet trailer > >> I agree that sticking the signatures in the packet trailer is the right >> thing to do. The zero out / hash self / rewrite hash dance is way too >> annoying. Also, when the signature is in the packet trailer the hash >> check can move straight to that and ignore the rest of the packet; and >> the regular parser can ignore the packet trailer and just parse the >> regular TLVs. > > That's what I think too, but David disagreed last time I asked him. > Since you agree with me, I think I'm going to insist on this one. > > (I assume your implementation correctly drops all non-HMAC TLVs from the > packet trailer, including PAD1.) If by 'drop' you mean 'ignore', then yes. I'm just reusing the TLV parsing loop with a different offset, and ignoring anything that's not HMAC. >>> 8. Index and Nonce size > >> Letting the nonce be of arbitrary size is fine, but doing the same thing >> for the index is incredibly annoying. Since the index needs to be stored >> with the same lifetime as the neighbour, making it arbitrary size means >> there's another blob of dynamically assigned memory to keep track of. >> Which may have to be resized later if the peer changes its index size. > > I think we have some time to decide, but here's a few arguments both ways. > > 1. We really want nonces to be of arbitrary size, so implementations have > the space to encode a cookie if they're concerned about DoS. Sure, that's fine. > 2. Having nonces of arbitrary size implies dynamic allocation. At any > rate, you need dynamic allocation for nonces, since they're > short-lived and per-neighbour. Not necessarily. When receiving a challenge request, you can just do memcpy(outgoing_packet_buffer, incoming_packet_buffer, nonce->size). And for the nonces you send yourself you know in advance what size they are going to be, so you can just put a static buffer of that size in 'struct neighbour'. > 3. You do want to allow tiny indices (unless we adopt Markus' proposal), > since some implementations will want to save bytes on the wire by > using a real-time clock. Sure, that's fine. Should 0-size be allowed, or should we require at least one byte? > 4. I don't see any good reason right now for long indices (more than 16 > bytes, say). Nope, me neither. > So right now (likely to change in the future), I'd argue for: > > - variable size nonces with no size limit; > - variable size indices. I'm fine with this. > I haven't made an opinion yet on whether we want a limit to the size of > indices. Well, I think we should. My implementation will currently discard any PC TLVs with an index longer than 10 bytes :) >> Or maybe just forgo the complexity entirely and make the index a >> fixed size; you just know that someone is going to pick a way too >> small value and make themselves susceptible to replay attacks at some >> point... > > Disagreed. Right, fair enough. As long as the danger of replay attacks is spelled out clearly in the draft I guess we can trust implementors to not do something stupid... -Toke From nobody Sun Jul 15 04:25:41 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A14C5130F65 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 04:25:38 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 Je_kFClVSZY6 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 04:25:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A4B9130E25 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 04:25:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6FBOq9c003690 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:24:52 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6FBP4pl014439; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:25:04 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4285CEB22E; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:25:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id WXCCq7kNz6LF; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:25:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B5F1FEB200; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:25:29 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:25:29 +0200 Message-ID: <87h8l0hhau.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: babel@ietf.org, Weronika =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Ko=B3odziejak?= , Clara =?ISO-8859-1?Q?D=F4?= In-Reply-To: <87r2k495y0.fsf@toke.dk> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87r2k495y0.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:24:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:25:05 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4B2F04.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B4B2F10.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4B2F04.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4B2F10.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4B2F04.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4B2F10.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 11:25:39 -0000 >> 2. Having nonces of arbitrary size implies dynamic allocation. At any >> rate, you need dynamic allocation for nonces, since they're >> short-lived and per-neighbour. > Not necessarily. When receiving a challenge request, you can just do > memcpy(outgoing_packet_buffer, incoming_packet_buffer, nonce->size). And > for the nonces you send yourself you know in advance what size they are > going to be, so you can just put a static buffer of that size in 'struct > neighbour'. Right on both counts. My bad. >> 3. You do want to allow tiny indices (unless we adopt Markus' proposal), >> since some implementations will want to save bytes on the wire by >> using a real-time clock. > Sure, that's fine. Should 0-size be allowed, or should we require at > least one byte? Allow it. The property that's required is that a node never reuses the same index with the same key -- one possible implementation strategy would be to perform key rotation whenever state has been lost, in which case 0-size indices would be fine. >> I haven't made an opinion yet on whether we want a limit to the size of >> indices. > Well, I think we should. My implementation will currently discard any PC > TLVs with an index longer than 10 bytes :) Hmm. I mean, hmm. >>> Or maybe just forgo the complexity entirely and make the index a >>> fixed size; you just know that someone is going to pick a way too >>> small value and make themselves susceptible to replay attacks at some >>> point... >> >> Disagreed. > Right, fair enough. As long as the danger of replay attacks is spelled > out clearly in the draft I guess we can trust implementors to not do > something stupid... More implementation guidance is needed in the draft, granted. -- Juliusz From nobody Sun Jul 15 06:06:30 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3AE2130DEA for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.011 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 6WWUNNaVjp0A for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in25.apple.com (mail-out25.apple.com [17.171.2.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0ED41294D0 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1531659985; x=2395573585; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ae/EyW/52JNY9ZcqbYcEajn//QH0Xw3mXw/ugZHCbNc=; b=I2xas3o53cHM8+LtcXCjYOESNdNEsGVYIkxu3heZdsz8wWn8PxvPLQDPphr8qFc1 D3MFdGJnEpMPmMC61bQF0DkFJYxW7UAjsApfYOCTYGuMkX3gIQWUMP2o/qMk1Rrp WzsmnhrclHOAZfQt1KrFXRJzSbZRXt+d2q68frxyQn9mV/RMRGc+cNjHE3CXkvzF oYu6X/d2My6Z0Z6Y5d/1QfS2tS6QSkRPKIi/vzymDL5zKytZgIncyM2LOk+cIoul olY0/1CaakwUnVjX6deatzHQ+ymoXRcPzYHz8uV9E24uP3Qd97zZd0ektdwH5Jgq NItIXZMJuAQEostNHCY+oQ==; X-AuditID: 11ab0219-56fff70000004c1b-07-5b4b46d12d36 Received: from ma1-mtap-s01.corp.apple.com (ma1-mtap-s01.corp.apple.com [17.40.76.5]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in25.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 89.40.19483.1D64B4B5; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com [17.128.115.204]) by ma1-mtap-s01.corp.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PBW00JW9SEPL810@ma1-mtap-s01.corp.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PBW00500S7BAZ00@nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-A: X-Va-T-CD: 7d6566e1ce32e60bd701207e1252a9a5 X-Va-E-CD: 25db9c8def847da5f3c8f83d464a40b5 X-Va-R-CD: fbd4a3ecf174248f2009b74dbcdd7cb8 X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: 8a0b6198-ed41-4233-948b-7290e776ebe4 X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 7d6566e1ce32e60bd701207e1252a9a5 X-V-E-CD: 25db9c8def847da5f3c8f83d464a40b5 X-V-R-CD: fbd4a3ecf174248f2009b74dbcdd7cb8 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: 6540cb7e-db33-424c-bf86-c93066d71efa Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PBW00400S57S600@nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-15_05:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp17.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.235.47.164] by nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PBW00L94SEMX040@nwk-mmpp-sz12.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi In-reply-to: <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 09:06:21 -0400 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= , =?utf-8?B?Q2xhcmEgRMO0?= , =?utf-8?Q?Weronika_Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , babel@ietf.org Message-id: References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrIIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiqOHDqnvRzTvaYN8yK4sti7pZLDZcXsds Mb91GZvF1vcr2C0+fLrD6sDqsXPWXXaPJUt+Mnks3vKW0WPLoYtsHq+mP2QPYI3isklJzcks Sy3St0vgylj1/BtLwUfWijkvXjM1MJ5h6WLk4JAQMJFYsj6qi5GLQ0hgP5PErx1LGLsYOTl4 BQQlfky+B1bDLCAvcfC8LEiYWUBL4vujVhaI+o1MEjcaD7CDJIQEupgk+q9Fg9gSAuwSf37t YIGwtSV2NfUxwth/Xl+Bs2/sPghVwyWxYOtpVghbV2J1/ws2CJtNYv2JJUwQtpbE0+3PWWHs 3gsLWGDs9j8/oOKcEue/TGSHsHUktlzaAXVoJ5PEmReHoAZlS2w5cQnqiGCJhxPaGCGKvjJK 7J+zHKxIWEBaouvCXVaQ74WBNlxYYQVisgGZB9YYgZicAhoSM3aDFbMIqEosXdLACAmfC4wS r5doQILQRqJpx1OwIUICcRK33xiAhEUEVCSWT3vGPoFRcRZSQM9CBPQspIBewMi8ilE4NzEz Rzczz8hUL7GgICdVLzk/dxMjKI2sZpLcwfj1teEhRgEORiUe3gobr2gh1sSy4srcQ4zSHCxK 4rwfd4lFCwmkJ5akZqemFqQWxReV5qQWH2Jk4uCUamCU0xcKa4iNXb177Zr7bBpnGJTObl3j uE1m5n22k2sbPjyYPmPTs6q9rG+TIxz3Pgkp4Wuc+P1n3Jkexf9nHP7/9mGY9HHmiiyXHD+j xZKBl7JPXlbat0ciaIFCRbLR8wC3No6SZPvZlXNKDobPOuVX3Lpz8hJHs8lX0tyvd19u4Uvs k3x8VnyyEktxRqKhFnNRcSIAI1undwQDAAA= Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:06:28 -0000 > On Jul 14, 2018, at 20:08, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > >> I agree that sticking the signatures in the packet trailer is the right >> thing to do. The zero out / hash self / rewrite hash dance is way too >> annoying. Also, when the signature is in the packet trailer the hash >> check can move straight to that and ignore the rest of the packet; and >> the regular parser can ignore the packet trailer and just parse the >> regular TLVs. > > That's what I think too, but David disagreed last time I asked him. > Since you agree with me, I think I'm going to insist on this one. I didn't disagree. My point was that I wasn't bothered by the zero out / hash / rewrite hash dance. But packet trailer is fine by me. David From nobody Sun Jul 15 06:34:48 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C400E130FB4 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:34:36 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 N02kVg4krw7m for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:34:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BCBC130EDA for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 06:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6FDXm7p024555 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:33:48 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6FDY1DU031281; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:34:01 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4F80EB22D; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:34:29 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id ndL17X0yQoVw; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:34:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A484CEB200; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:34:28 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:34:28 +0200 Message-ID: <87bmb8hbbv.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: David Schinazi Cc: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= , Clara =?ISO-8859-1?Q?D=F4?= , Weronika =?ISO-8859-2?Q?K?= =?ISO-8859-2?Q?o=B3odziejak?= , babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:33:48 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:34:01 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4B4D3C.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B4B4D49.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4B4D3C.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4B4D49.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4B4D3C.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4B4D49.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Packet trailer [was: Some open HMAC issues] X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:34:47 -0000 >> That's what I think too, but David disagreed last time I asked him. >> Since you agree with me, I think I'm going to insist on this one. > I didn't disagree. My point was that I wasn't bothered by the > zero out / hash / rewrite hash dance. But packet trailer is fine by me. Appendix A. Use of the packet trailer The protocol described in this document uses the packet trailer for storing HMAC TLVs. RFC 6126bis [RFC6126bis] leaves the format of the packet trailer undefined. If the final version of this specification uses the packet trailer, RFC 6126bis will need to be extended with information about the format of the packet trailer. This document assumes that the packet trailer has the same format as the packet body, i.e., that it consists of a sequence of TLVs. The receiver MUST silently ignore any TLV found in the packet trailer unless its definition states that the TLV is allowed in the packet trailer. Do y'all think we can achieve some sort of consensus on that, so I can go update 6126bis? -- Juliusz From nobody Sun Jul 15 07:48:15 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEE50130EE0 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 mBagSu8X2w0j for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in23.apple.com (mail-out23.apple.com [17.171.2.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30EC130ED3 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1531666075; x=2395579675; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=I5ZSaeAY2ArRjP+dkJtvFbClM9NT/YiR81gAjB/6I8s=; b=ittsNu6CI9CdZROochC8ExSJgAcmij57toNjaxCcDE+jmyLHVb7q8hEFaGCYsVG4 amBeA4mnN0kZFEOwA9XUDZZ3V6lbS2+/klmX+0qjX5rIHj6ro+WqvccO0+FifIkm njh5RZM8KPgiAebQv9InjMGcCMQM5gWEmWvM50wU14HJF5DtTMzqgsVfbKds7QVJ Ozxo17WnhZK1CCVtf+SXkH8lfb8dKdmw+7lGnKMgDP4GKOKJwlSJSHeKjrqLQ+pT ln7exld0nDCAbjxpCZXlMpk0HQf8kj+7M9XLmd//N/OZygZSslG4a1i3bDF7e6mV w0T70ZB/XzhzgV6m0oCI6w==; X-AuditID: 11ab0217-d0fff70000003e90-50-5b4b5e9a1434 Received: from ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com (ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com [17.40.76.7]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in23.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 74.22.16016.A9E5B4B5; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com [17.128.115.216]) by ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PBW00KKTX3UOO10@ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PBW00900WT1Q200@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-A: X-Va-T-CD: 7d6566e1ce32e60bd701207e1252a9a5 X-Va-E-CD: bc7a3bd410123420021c43118c013ab2 X-Va-R-CD: 97693546197a992182ff3951840d2106 X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: 00ad1d94-4838-4cc1-b690-abe29b177315 X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 7d6566e1ce32e60bd701207e1252a9a5 X-V-E-CD: bc7a3bd410123420021c43118c013ab2 X-V-R-CD: 97693546197a992182ff3951840d2106 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: 6640bdff-3d8e-4c6f-8ef8-70623e25e28a Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PBW00500WJ7EN00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-15_05:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp18.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.235.47.164] by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PBW00MGDX3S8Q60@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 07:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi In-reply-to: <87bmb8hbbv.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 10:47:51 -0400 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Weronika_Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= , =?utf-8?B?Q2xhcmEgRMO0?= , babel@ietf.org Message-id: References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmb8hbbv.wl-jch@irif.fr> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrCIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiqOHDrjs7zjvaYGUTs8WWRd0sFhsur2O2 mN+6jM1i6/sV7BYfPt1hdWD12DnrLrvHkiU/mTwWb3nL6LHl0EU2j1fTH7IHsEZx2aSk5mSW pRbp2yVwZVw52ctacJOrYnKjRwPjMo4uRk4OCQETiau7mxi7GLk4hAT2M0nsOnaFDSTBKyAo 8WPyPZYuRg4OZgF5iYPnZUHCzAJaEt8ftbKA2EICG5kkVp3hhujtYpJ433mVHWIou8SfXztY IGxtiV1NfYwgc0Dsuy95YcJXeiewQthcEgu2noaydSWezD7PCGGzSaw/sYQJwtaSeLr9OSuM vejUE2YYe/Kp81CrOCXOf5kIdYKOxMkrD6H+6mSSuHiuH2potsSWE5eg7gmW2P9WGaLmK6PE 0inrwBYIC0hLdF24C2U7SKxYe40ZpJ4NaNmBNUYgYU4BDYmVn6eAlbAIqEo0LfjPBjKHWeAc o8Tac6uYIWFoI3Hn3TM2iAVrGSUW3v0Ddp2IgIrE8mnP2CcwKs5CCutZiLCehRTWCxiZVzEK 5yZm5uhm5hkZ6yUWFOSk6iXn525iBCWT1UziOxg/vzY8xCjAwajEw1th4xUtxJpYVlyZe4hR moNFSZz3wy6xaCGB9MSS1OzU1ILUovii0pzU4kOMTBycUg2MxbOKP/QHvz6z38HRf/b9Cb82 Ll/08cbFQ0v3ai+/ftaas3jdJssM9uQnf/mrv01bv+dZRZqeyVTJa0HmNwLi2CqYPtgI5wkr JOQ//nWmLtZhwYSLx3/szXDqz+I9/F0n7v73TSrBbYmTd9yyYdWVa92sYfhwVlJDdIbe4861 KlYW/+5+3DdTQ4mlOCPRUIu5qDgRAEg5YHsHAwAA Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Packet trailer [was: Some open HMAC issues] X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 14:48:14 -0000 That's fine by me. David > On Jul 15, 2018, at 09:34, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > >>> That's what I think too, but David disagreed last time I asked him. >>> Since you agree with me, I think I'm going to insist on this one. > >> I didn't disagree. My point was that I wasn't bothered by the >> zero out / hash / rewrite hash dance. But packet trailer is fine by me. > > Appendix A. Use of the packet trailer > > The protocol described in this document uses the packet trailer for > storing HMAC TLVs. RFC 6126bis [RFC6126bis] leaves the format of the > packet trailer undefined. If the final version of this specification > uses the packet trailer, RFC 6126bis will need to be extended with > information about the format of the packet trailer. > > This document assumes that the packet trailer has the same format as > the packet body, i.e., that it consists of a sequence of TLVs. The > receiver MUST silently ignore any TLV found in the packet trailer > unless its definition states that the TLV is allowed in the packet > trailer. > > Do y'all think we can achieve some sort of consensus on that, so I can go > update 6126bis? > > -- Juliusz > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel From nobody Sun Jul 15 13:05:49 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2470130E77 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:05:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 85CU50IIMERs for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:05:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50E69130E48 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:05:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1531685143; bh=1CjUlVabVsIBdqrJWCogQxukb7wZ0dT8wQ8jIxiRfLg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=WRXDRPmZHNsuOLE+VhbSbotx0bRcWZJYlP0EguBTMZE34WGzVbwI9Sprtqr08izQ/ 3wTmQLWIJ1UwfTV4XiNGGyG4l62UvwgISm8VWZjwP5jZFA2MLnu9dwIKLqIF9pJ7S8 hXycHkUrzKbJGtpDV2UslLixlTJWQSWOrVW6ilq9GylOij7owb+hhvYjKaF70lQ/Xu nmYrz6bvjUymAH6LNnsTzNqc+sIE3Iz8SYS+ajmx3BVNBU7IChEmAfeZfWaWaDgxNn jCpb9b5gRMEEHjDQbzpVG8Nv6GFaAJXGVoEffck2XViwmvBTChpDdIqmYhTB7q0r63 sFGfHw03xdEgg== To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: babel@ietf.org, Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= In-Reply-To: <87h8l0hhau.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87r2k495y0.fsf@toke.dk> <87h8l0hhau.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 22:05:32 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87d0vo8dtf.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 20:05:48 -0000 Juliusz Chroboczek writes: >>> 3. You do want to allow tiny indices (unless we adopt Markus' proposal), >>> since some implementations will want to save bytes on the wire by >>> using a real-time clock. > >> Sure, that's fine. Should 0-size be allowed, or should we require at >> least one byte? > > Allow it. The property that's required is that a node never reuses the > same index with the same key -- one possible implementation strategy > would be to perform key rotation whenever state has been lost, in > which case 0-size indices would be fine. OK, fine with me. >>> I haven't made an opinion yet on whether we want a limit to the size of >>> indices. > >> Well, I think we should. My implementation will currently discard any PC >> TLVs with an index longer than 10 bytes :) > > Hmm. > > I mean, hmm. What? Are you saying that getting standards modified so they fit your implementation is *not* how one is supposed to approach the IETF? ;) -Toke From nobody Sun Jul 15 13:05:57 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56B33130E96 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:05:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 c6oDwqF4tfbU for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 676F2130E8F for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 13:05:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1531685151; bh=Z7AiuS+WyGU7wZIgdTl1cMhKvvnkHYWM3hFToeUqOu4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=dCUxFpkP8fisVvmiiQ8KeK5YpXdCEFpVnpWUsASWozyEo8CY2xF/RjOpxO1RY17X7 xyupekp1kNXN3gRpWy0BMSy9ciL+Z3n6BAQSeJee9n4ds2XrdSNAzP82ULF6u3Nn3J PhbWaLxt6tQhAx1ZUyKUtJrVfK00s56+ouU8rusGBQXYNKJrSAXl034egarTuacUuG mHvLvREb9GBbVOxvy9eIVReahD0JkAuUKfiUiXHGzaeBY6noINBdwSZl6OIcAMnaTi /JxvX4ZfvM6LaKYPerbX8m11M2v52xdDzGiCokbgMY8hmvObwqmW2Mh1AJZSkOWrcW o0ksjnjpjckUQ== To: David Schinazi , Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Weronika =?utf-8?Q?Ko=C5=82odziejak?= , Clara =?utf-8?Q?D=C3=B4?= , babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmb8hbbv.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 22:05:47 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87a7qs8dt0.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Packet trailer [was: Some open HMAC issues] X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 20:05:55 -0000 David Schinazi writes: > That's fine by me. Also fine with me. -Toke From nobody Sun Jul 15 15:44:31 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17B9130E88 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:44:29 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 WuqRunFpsM7N for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:44:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DF09130DC5 for ; Sun, 15 Jul 2018 15:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6FMhhiq027254 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:43:43 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6FMhv63016612; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:43:57 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7034BEB22D; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:44:25 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id Ky-yv1Ci5Vzv; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:44:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5ED4BEB200; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:44:24 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:44:24 +0200 Message-ID: <87efg45dbr.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Toke =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= Cc: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <87d0vo8dtf.fsf@toke.dk> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87r2k495y0.fsf@toke.dk> <87h8l0hhau.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87d0vo8dtf.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:43:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:43:57 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4BCE1F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B4BCE2D.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4BCE1F.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4BCE2D.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4BCE1F.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4BCE2D.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 22:44:30 -0000 >> Hmm. >> >> I mean, hmm. > What? Are you saying that getting standards modified so they fit your > implementation is *not* how one is supposed to approach the IETF? ;) For the record, my approach to IETF activities is: - implement the protocol we have in mind; - describe our implementation in an I-D; - get Toke to implement the I-D; - say hmm; - win the World Cup (a pity for Croatia, though); - produce a new I-D integrating Toke's comments. -- Juliusz From nobody Mon Jul 16 02:40:00 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4328D130F7B for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 N-tkoCme8MlE for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B63DF130F74 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1531733992; bh=bhYmigGMAvMkhdKwWA0gQktBdPHo99633jHcaV1YYbM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=xpS9Xv6JvvlPKzSNf8GGLfokZyvwdRzRzlJvpQ+HNuxdQizE99o9ZUROxTw2zUTU4 iBjtR8POAxt9+xTHKrUlTQ7wQK+DbA8KTTIzhi8CQYpcLtjOM/c0CN7V6/wmOhF64r tBLC07L0ZKW3qD19mHccLhxaG+XBBmUmbRjPl5Uy/7dIgBWzHnpE3N1b+dMpviz4CG pXU3/47PAFaxCfA+ONRD5FxQSmg0Qg/GBDc+g1yXj+5VsG9HsrSXjP+HejmRbEP2oo TEKTB9bZbHN16FecEH/Je/1ChDR+fheaRoY7TUHMFgdVyxgodP3F/RjLASoZbZH1ig WEsykHEWAt7eQ== To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <87efg45dbr.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <87sh545st3.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87bmbb9jyw.fsf@toke.dk> <87sh4luzrn.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87r2k495y0.fsf@toke.dk> <87h8l0hhau.wl-jch@irif.fr> <87d0vo8dtf.fsf@toke.dk> <87efg45dbr.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 11:39:47 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87lgab7c4c.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Some open HMAC issues X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:39:58 -0000 Juliusz Chroboczek writes: >>> Hmm. >>> >>> I mean, hmm. > >> What? Are you saying that getting standards modified so they fit your >> implementation is *not* how one is supposed to approach the IETF? ;) > > For the record, my approach to IETF activities is: > > - implement the protocol we have in mind; > - describe our implementation in an I-D; > - get Toke to implement the I-D; > - say hmm; With you so far... > - win the World Cup (a pity for Croatia, though); ... but this implies our next window for publishing anything is 2022, and that we would all have to root for France. I'm not sure I'm okay with either of those conditions. > - produce a new I-D integrating Toke's comments. This is, of course, the central point that I can only agree with :D -Toke From nobody Mon Jul 16 05:49:19 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25B1D131047 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 05:49:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 TRGmgntIYhdV for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 05:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71D1713103A for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 05:49:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6GCmWWt008482 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:48:32 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6GCmjMk006137; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:48:45 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4393EB22D; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:49:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id kvl5hU5OT5fW; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:49:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lanthane.irif.fr (unknown [172.23.36.89]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82162EB22E; Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:49:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:49:12 +0200 Message-ID: <87va9fcpmf.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org, babel@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:48:32 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 16 Jul 2018 14:48:45 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4C9420.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B4C942D.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4C9420.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4C942D.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4C9420.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4C942D.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Babel@IETF meeting Tuesday 17th -- please participate remotely X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 12:49:18 -0000 Dear all, The Babel working group of the IETF will be meeting on Tuesday 17 July at 9:30 Montréal time (EDT, UTC-4) 1:30 UTC 3:30 Paris time (UTC+2) Highlights include a presentation by David Schinazi about DTLS security for Babel (joint work with Antonin Décimo), and a presentation by myself about HMAC security for Babel (joint work with Clara Dô and Weronika Ko³odziejak). The full agenda is here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/102/materials/agenda-102-babel and you can will find a copy of the slides here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/agenda/ You are all warmly encouraged to particpate remotely -- you don't even need a webcam, it is possible to ask questions through Jabber. You will need to register with your real name, but the registration is free. Please see here: https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/102/remote/ Once you've registered, choose "Meetecho", and go to room "Saint Paul/Sainte Catherine". See you tomorrow, -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Jul 18 04:39:19 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91B35130DE9 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 04:39:17 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 cFDiIsI-Lq1z for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 04:39:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E1DE126CC7 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 04:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6IBcVr7022294 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:38:31 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6IBciVd007097; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:38:44 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 281C3EB22E; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:39:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id qSROo1BHgv5u; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:39:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 317EAEB200; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:39:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:39:12 +0200 Message-ID: <871sc0rcwv.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: babel@ietf.org CC: Denis Ovsienko User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:38:31 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:38:44 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4F26B7.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B4F26C4.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4F26B7.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4F26C4.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4F26B7.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4F26C4.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] About Babel's complexity, and why it is unchanged by DTLS X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:39:18 -0000 I'd like to clarify the comment I made about DTLS yesterday. In principle, an implementation of Babel keeps state proportional to O(r * n) where n is the number of neighbours and r the total number of routes being advertised. More precisely: - the neighbour table is O(n); - the route table is O(r * n). An implementation can reduce that, with no protocol changes, to O(n) by purging redundant routes from the route table, at the cost of slower reconvergence after a failure (babeld will purge redundant routes when malloc failes, but this code hasn't been tested much). (Aside: naive link-state suffers from the same quadratic behaviour. OSPF and IS-IS work around the issue by using network pseudo-nodes and delegated routers, and if your goal is to connect 20000 routers to a single switch, you should be using OSPF or IS-IS rather than Babel.) Both the DTLS and HMAC extensions expand the neighbour structure with extra data -- DTLS adds the DTLS state, while HMAC adds the last index and PC. This increases the amount of state by O(n) -- which doesn't change the complexity figures above. In short -- adding DTLS to Babel does not fundamentally change the scaling properties of the protocol. -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Jul 18 07:41:39 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2AFC1311A6 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:41:34 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 ME0CFUdBsxxz for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CC0B1311BE for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 07:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6IEeiKv022633 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:40:44 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6IEewfJ009920 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:40:58 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E69DEB279 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:41:26 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id ugB_iI5UUWUI for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:41:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D738CEB22E for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:41:20 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:41:20 +0200 Message-ID: <8736wg38tr.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: babel@ietf.org User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:40:44 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:40:58 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B4F516C.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B4F517A.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4F516C.003 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B4F517A.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4F516C.003 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B4F517A.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Use of packet trailer -- please protest now or never X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:41:38 -0000 Dear all, There has been no objection to the use of the packet trailer by draft-do-babel-hmac, and some amount of support (support from Toke, Clara, Weronika and myself, weak support from David). I'd like to update rfc6126bis with a specification of the packet trailer (see Appendix A of draft-do). If you see any good reasons why we shouldn't be using the packet trailer, please share them now, since I'd like to revise rfc6126bis. Thanks, -- Juliusz From nobody Wed Jul 18 14:55:37 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2AC8130FF3 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:55:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.748 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 CV47yaUCCrdM for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:55:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x235.google.com (mail-io0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A54AD131069 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:55:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x235.google.com with SMTP id l25-v6so5378003ioh.12 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:55:32 -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=seAay9ZW7ragdt52CclRqMSSx1LitjUz1OMTmqQo6kM=; b=M3+zd29qWtC1vfCYi8QqlfYf06G6VnXdph0A2Uaka6DBbnf5W4DEoqNoi5h1rILpPi Vc2VrelMPwg6S0fpKUen/mjujrXd+gfTat0pkyh/ANh4fi6dfNtOphAnyOS8sRXqj3ad AsxUfQsDbNRYUZF9DVpDoT2gTg0kcT5xRFI1jaeNrrv5QRBGMhmKTXi7M0GMKdojc9pq WbHAnc40XSmVDCpHjv9o71yYI3oDhtP484RhV3q5Cf/WWJHCvsFyz2UmtT54Sj2/CK1y lGTxVnZkgY/VuGuPmqk40rVQ57ItoNAQVQAwkzEcfpP/26/rF6wpYzDNwkl35okZte8A /23Q== 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=seAay9ZW7ragdt52CclRqMSSx1LitjUz1OMTmqQo6kM=; b=SOlCDAIFUbc1PYt9o0egxdCQmouvdpK61vXPOXY+zHzcvF0GQOUCeTGbOaeExYq66+ Q5yFpuzh3tbsSHJtheviypazOCcOW3WHEwZF9Eo2iYhUH5q0MOwvpTiNsj59c3StEXZ8 ytHZWXG6U5y6oFgCMhfJRd5GLRi5GfP+QfKKdopNiop1c9xrWcahyiMIPKgLhTEPoo5k lU5a9KTSDHOWBl5sIlVSVifSOUwGooo1O9cXqoIIGy56bkAj8uoli+xOZeWWaSMikuzv dLvvpQGInzjW/Bl1v00YhHCAvkTrOmmLhdkkAUFpRXuTQvBhuhMxdByCbsKoMrWJqD7X Rjgw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlH0ht+A8xpyFZSfSApYO2IujNF2UIGgOzlB2yBktAOR+CUhk1sl UHEFPSDioJV6mSZsem/rF8Si7kxmw6s3UVNi9iY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdU99dnrVHttXMg/l3qQMpWIsJq4FB8jQJz5CE6SugoTFcTmw/98RsouuM7mp9oF01T9sz3XIbT12PV06OOFLU= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:e403:: with SMTP id u3-v6mr6270435iog.131.1531950931823; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:55:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:bf84:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:55:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8736wg38tr.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <8736wg38tr.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 17:55:16 -0400 Message-ID: To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001ad44905714d1f08" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Use of packet trailer -- please protest now or never X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 21:55:36 -0000 --0000000000001ad44905714d1f08 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Although I think it is more common in IETF protocols to include such an authentication inside the message being authenticated, there is no technical reason not to use a trailer. So I'm fine with either way the WG wants to go. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > Dear all, > > There has been no objection to the use of the packet trailer by > draft-do-babel-hmac, and some amount of support (support from Toke, Clara, > Weronika and myself, weak support from David). I'd like to update > rfc6126bis with a specification of the packet trailer (see Appendix A of > draft-do). > > If you see any good reasons why we shouldn't be using the packet trailer, > please share them now, since I'd like to revise rfc6126bis. > > Thanks, > > -- Juliusz > > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --0000000000001ad44905714d1f08 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Although I think it is more common in IETF protocols to in= clude such an authentication inside the message being authenticated, there = is no technical reason not to use a trailer. So I'm fine with either wa= y the WG wants to go.


On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Juliusz Ch= roboczek <jch@irif.fr> wrote:
De= ar all,

There has been no objection to the use of the packet trailer by
draft-do-babel-hmac, and some amount of support (support from Toke, Clara,<= br> Weronika and myself, weak support from David).=C2=A0 I'd like to update=
rfc6126bis with a specification of the packet trailer (see Appendix A of draft-do).

If you see any good reasons why we shouldn't be using the packet traile= r,
please share them now, since I'd like to revise rfc6126bis.

Thanks,

-- Juliusz


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

--0000000000001ad44905714d1f08-- From nobody Thu Jul 19 01:53:20 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E47130DE8 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 01:53:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info 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 bV2d4ywW_OQv for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 01:53:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07C94127148 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 01:53:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1531990390; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=1183; bh=RwbM/qlOgdKc0niK4q8zWBomKQKWyrU8fkIa9/tLzOI=; b=E/bs0LexLFf9B1/mraebudkd/8UrullsUuHlYDFUscgJf7NMfv0eRYABcF3ccwcg fo7QJM2CdsWM/f4xr6B/usXlIzyMuPUsVHEHdJ1hEfHk6L6nz3aS5wMP276gXz0KFmw SDJhCmveT3LPo0n2AE7LZlK9+mdVDPdrjN3GoeeY= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1531990389964586.074733934601; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 01:53:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:53:09 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: Message-ID: <164b1be34c9.1162aef0a154544.1181395100483129401@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: <8736wg38tr.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <8736wg38tr.wl-jch@irif.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Use of packet trailer -- please protest now or never X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:53:19 -0000 ---- On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 15:41:20 +0100 Juliusz Chroboczek wrote ---- > Dear all, > > There has been no objection to the use of the packet trailer by > draft-do-babel-hmac, and some amount of support (support from Toke, Clara, > Weronika and myself, weak support from David). I'd like to update > rfc6126bis with a specification of the packet trailer (see Appendix A of > draft-do). > > If you see any good reasons why we shouldn't be using the packet trailer, > please share them now, since I'd like to revise rfc6126bis. Juliusz, you have conveniently forgotten that draft-do-babel-hmac is _not_ a working group document at this time, and also that 6126 _is_ a working group document, and that changes to working group documents must reflect working group consensus, even when you are listed as the author or a co-author. It is understandable you do not want to wait any longer because draft-do-babel-hmac, despite its document name, was mostly written by you, rather than Clara or Weronika. But this fact does not imply you can start, end, or override a WG adoption call on your own. This is a remit of the chairs. -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Thu Jul 19 03:17:12 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59922128BAC for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 03:17:10 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 wlp3G2H5Ef_O for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 03:17:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEF32126BED for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 03:17:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6JAGK0m025447 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:16:20 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6JAGXTC022165; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:16:33 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD4DEB22D; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:17:02 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id boIPJDoUoUz2; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:17:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1A58EEB279; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:17:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:17:00 +0200 Message-ID: <87pnzjcyxv.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Denis Ovsienko Cc: In-Reply-To: <164b1be34c9.1162aef0a154544.1181395100483129401@ovsienko.info> References: <8736wg38tr.wl-jch@irif.fr> <164b1be34c9.1162aef0a154544.1181395100483129401@ovsienko.info> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:16:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:16:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B5064F4.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B506501.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B5064F4.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B506501.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B5064F4.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B506501.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Use of packet trailer -- please protest now or never X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 10:17:11 -0000 >> I'd like to update rfc6126bis with a specification of the packet >> trailer (see Appendix A of draft-do). > Juliusz, you have conveniently forgotten that draft-do-babel-hmac is > _not_ a working group document at this time, and also that 6126 _is_ > a working group document, and that changes to working group documents > must reflect working group consensus, even when you are listed as the > author or a co-author. If you want me to refrain from updating rfc6126bis for the time being, that's a reasonable request. -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Jul 19 05:38:24 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39671130DD3; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:38:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 CjAGVBbhGLCm; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x234.google.com (mail-it0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14070129619; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x234.google.com with SMTP id y124-v6so1947919itc.0; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:38:21 -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=dr8ys8ME6cOJCXJXCh8EdwA4CnOW1j7/NSo3GuDeHvU=; b=RRd2svZ4F05duu8/1c8FpSdCeBlPUv233NVk74TZ0taJIan9Eu+ko2FHjX7juGFxgz u1znFnswdxpowls4sNgIdM5QZWHsmah/UOIyxxj9KsaYZUd4QKDO9T++SFda5AH4UymG mEugc2hcxpL882WRiv1ovCUlbVSRztPUE78G5oQaomkzdEWtZWGtHfrqQNAXHkslwcd9 BiQYTSbjZQc8FhnS2Qy0pcEuSAO3dBSRoTkA7dJnWomr/bEBMSs5fiSi+1jkcn64dYe8 FAQ3oEFCstBTKmmlwPC0kFd8k6KLeXhsyBjElCMwsPZ8ShSU4SQgHaPUrf8tscIq40R9 n2Dw== 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=dr8ys8ME6cOJCXJXCh8EdwA4CnOW1j7/NSo3GuDeHvU=; b=IdG6WlcZrODrC6sj7p+UrP2YGZwa+RLLa/pXRU8E1xf7j7AqqwVFHAzemGs2liH6kA KTAMGKZkjuSUqW2KFBYaW0k4Xt0vVcpur3RJC5zg8YBX4hfG8GPXg0FR/hZJQEMpjx+5 OqEdFC75nsD8k8huKtP8tJEagtpI93fTYqkjLt8O9S70nsHOJ4WkEzMM5r+Nq79LZO1v F7ibAp24u2sf0pdzG7qMRTS+KcnwbGmDRB9sYPiU4Kve4wCQgg9QapJ6+y82M5sTuQyf 04n56m+30b2UZ5NjwagMPVO2la7G8QSML5WlfJJurcQ2cGGQqwd99OaUh0PXa54Om1rk YKmA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHFWkzwlZbCNEkR8U2RLtqYxMAaAqb/FQA+SUxieY530lFQnbsN uzIKeNrPm+z2wgQgKKQiEHyf+eXHRSxTw9qaPCfDkdl7 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdgtYuyLARIP6YnlQ3RCWFEMAoi/67wJTAxQ0/DIGZWptneP44aAcwVCG2v/Eah8j+rA0rdtMQOQrEwnQAZ6Zw= X-Received: by 2002:a24:7d0a:: with SMTP id b10-v6mr5401525itc.105.1532003900078; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:38:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:bf84:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:38:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:38:04 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] WG Consensus for draft-ietf-babel-applicabiity X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:38:22 -0000 WG consensus was declared by the chairs for draft-ietf-babel-applicability-03 during the Babel WG meeting at IETF-102. Thanks, Donald and Russ From nobody Thu Jul 19 05:43:59 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E0F129619; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:43:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 i3_sD1dsgE0c; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:43:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x230.google.com (mail-it0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB93130DCF; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:43:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x230.google.com with SMTP id d70-v6so1954599ith.1; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:43:55 -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=7DYAWskzKvrULOhl//s/z/Fl3dAjATnMS5pEBYJgCX8=; b=jQHLAO9PDn6we2XkTfQ+XjChNoS84x9q3m5z8sDNKDOeXaR9eNpnGY5ccSOiGhw7el 0evAHPQB+mVSDlB8zD7QaB9RBzuQMTxv7e6TiegoIBn0v7mwuAjuduvfYXwvGUZ42rj9 E0mPN02fZ0E4tFgyeTVTxpYvCFJb/kNfE7Q40C27g0LdKyssvxdYR0dpgcNM0prFv2iw UJ++60PDoi3P3YZTgdEFVzBoQzUz35+3lFl71fxOnBphl9ky+ItybWQBGIK+1XAhDWiY bSGCMt5D3v/ym+7m8mguL/gthRzJOIDOsGk23dNgsF283Sx22SzRAAvNrV5W//1nqF1e iutw== 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=7DYAWskzKvrULOhl//s/z/Fl3dAjATnMS5pEBYJgCX8=; b=i3v+p3QCPNQSkd5sSM2Bcd4ql7yc7E3N+w3S8QMNhr8Wqt6HZHG3Kh8xbsbXou4+0n zOvTMu4svEOepUZpwIXU0lAM9or9vJNod+fkWfouChOoYm4YluHehOyuxcvVs4WC0x/M 2LIXEcxbhtrZB5hMI7LUvhmkoN++75TxQo2fUt9QqFm2zcuyhTHfcG1/Kdp6VNX0LArZ 54A5VdV4PSiCf+dV8u1sK1h1CFcwE4+QV5mi4Nsy4AV5+iZE4TTN93pmp9jaJy3wQ8cn FFQ+pjkROV2PukswemEmaC1OklInKrjM+cxDNpllSXOHesdaZM3/Aj/L8AzaqQVCPm7q HzhA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlETBB39jispB8clyq17HwdcHATs6wOTalVl+WPthy9TQynSqseu mdgLlAfYq2GeGr0T5A9wg0HdymbO7x8B9T60RedImCkL X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfM9eXZSKte0KRRxNL9v7rWwO3pa7o5+vRdZHaVV+9i26Uam2fHwNuejJXJnnMVs3dkt/PcgRsVcBIIT1RYAag= X-Received: by 2002:a24:4444:: with SMTP id o65-v6mr530193ita.94.1532004235041; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:43:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:bf84:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:43:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:43:39 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:43:57 -0000 This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Thu Jul 19 05:46:56 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68065130DD5; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:46:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 JyMCifFQq9Ts; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22f.google.com (mail-it0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75623129619; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id p17-v6so9033842itc.2; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:46:53 -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=9Wu0mVofhg3UhKgI8gaX7jawr7YPZFQCW6BY1YbNa6w=; b=JcCZ4Ph+X9d614beC0p9bhNb8wlnPtFFOAcowcrU0Cfk/utY+ogu/Whot1OEA6H4nK raeOu1tQCPWnvGXXZNAVWIs5sA5ldvaoWgH9TwK6MT5rz21nA+BB/GCLMab1TADcqUEe GAQl1UO34xj/to4OHrEjWYVz9hwNEvHiX43Zxube9gYPx8BEdMY5vlsAwhRTp3G9jAm/ 30QeLWlE+0CqP1hFlk7Lcfv9csRzvtU731wOiCcXYZeWXEG/HtrnmgZFiSBCrkDxORYs hCS9RTxGzsRyAu9dS9KuDCkFuZ+YcYP7ID8zN/qmgo4LDOtPqQOMiay6anA4kvrJmx6/ brMw== 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=9Wu0mVofhg3UhKgI8gaX7jawr7YPZFQCW6BY1YbNa6w=; b=DZIqgKSSGhtFgI2wCYRSkw0ItYBd0WGhlDGcuqVCE0vrKfwg0/8qX9YEnrK5IccCn8 EaKUn0mWdhFvHKfZaidtEokqSEd+PVkxDCGwj5Tv4K/TmoN3GqZBB/3cl7LQcvbpDSYX kDkyeh6CrZQxDbCFROV9OsKd61QsIDeHsZ03Len/i/bZSvQvQzxdUsnnlVaiB0xhxRJO MNNW4I2UZooqdWbhQyLoHSLPgaiFCQhdPuvQt5yakU/yTWPSbh0RqyaDekIchwrAJG9x pBzI7N0EVsx5M13eYOLzyNsmgalQHWvKzmo0Qtu2G8tff8hFyeyBdSFW1F5i+jfHBkiw GDlQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFqJ5E0zRX6ZW22DXk6OCr6SIuoiyDGFnbXUdK6oYsrj7+dp1oS XildvDDPo2to+iYqOz6NVGZfWPPwuwvkB6/ybGQHWwlF X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpe0lxOKph2ucGyM85zE0quigmrsL3uwdNoekncPgvZwvcUf5B7m7i6xXzge0PYjcyVL+suJapG6xqGff1ajIhM= X-Received: by 2002:a24:4444:: with SMTP id o65-v6mr537586ita.94.1532004412659; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:46:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:bf84:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 05:46:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:46:37 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 12:46:55 -0000 This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Thu Jul 19 06:21:23 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2089129619 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 6-pFzwOfUbDq for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22c.google.com (mail-it0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10350130DF0 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id g141-v6so6817207ita.4 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=25s3PAksQ0LVH0NQOqHoq+FaKOcSUq23h7V6Z2wEc5E=; b=bU3jhNYUYM5J+tvbtBdQ0IBiowndmQTooI98q20oXkg6Ox9opbwgYfNrZoGb8HTGvW 15AUKTGtu5bCYOyDn148KDFnXmYbzyGNJhX133beWPpoHMndMDxxmVG8Lf+elVh19J4j joWh9KNHtz13kia+IkO5dfV/NHtfZtYCLQmTy8yHepDE4FhC90DtvuBR+vcsVnXlzkyF /codGSIYaNbuHWhrt+KF8C+79p2fQEKW8MDT3vmq1QIbDBlya+u0tykuCT5VhFzc+w1i MEqcv/LFiwxVH8ljRsXE5qEUVtluZO1VAuXth6lOZoJRwq2TvwjMzyej1l6t6DxWSpkw NW3w== 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=25s3PAksQ0LVH0NQOqHoq+FaKOcSUq23h7V6Z2wEc5E=; b=RZpTQq/xmc1rUN6vdkaZ1Cg1cux3X5Iqi2iPoowUROViDHIK/nsRcYztNaHP4NanWx 5oCl0x7mLO0O603fPfY02rlSsvC5sCsqS2qoA+sPqUi2W3J94I1jU4Z0aQKo/FDFZv/p Ewh1GStk1ADGP0VOzLZbH8ThTaojash18ipl1CGxosgsmuK9MqiFzbDfqbKRx6wp9Cdy CwvXfiK36Y4Fzr0nDWY4b1TMo27YfHWTW8a6L2FU0ev6ux4Sc4zFY7+z5iAmJ2ndzRvc cSMQvLNBDfR+vY0vpXIf5V8ERknxE+zbnxQlNFN3479dZp78VABLS8ABHdZSW/B3aan7 k1Mw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFt+ex/TST5w2drGikJUrMESMAiYbINpMFcshXKuAhOYsBZ59O6 nZGye4dTh84wZa81dg20bVpWKXoXeKB/ajflrBapEQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpd4tIZg3YfZ0dLd2EEimWnX/1no83JwTafg1x0gL7AM0YOBNknm0hbRj4i6CzZpd+JGbj8yPUcjjhjWX4gLsNY= X-Received: by 2002:a02:4c9b:: with SMTP id q27-v6mr9076823jad.38.1532006470334; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a4f:b442:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:20:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ted Lemon Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:20:29 -0400 Message-ID: To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007553da05715a0d4d" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:21:16 -0000 --0000000000007553da05715a0d4d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think the document should be adopted=E2=80=94it addresses the use case ab= out which I care most: securing babel on homenets. On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. > > Thanks, > Donald > =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 > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --0000000000007553da05715a0d4d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think the document should be adopted=E2=80=94it addresse= s the use case about which I care most: securing babel on homenets.

On Thu, Jul 19, 201= 8 at 8:46 AM, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:
This message begins a WG adoption call for dra= ft-do-babel-hmac.
Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit
longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you
think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also
welcome.

Thanks,
Donald
=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
=C2=A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd=C2=A0 =C2=A0+1-508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2=A01424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail.com

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

--0000000000007553da05715a0d4d-- From nobody Thu Jul 19 06:22:31 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC6F130DE0 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:22:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 LAOyUYapc7HF for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22c.google.com (mail-it0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D2EE130DCE for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id 188-v6so9162187ita.5 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:22:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5I3MaPuQekUSX8QqcIQcRHhQNNfxc9JDDbmixsI4NJ4=; b=18UsKJV0CTygU2l1PQtRP30TlxADklrtc3O4/cdue9MZ7qJMcU+lu8EKuyeJUV+vnk uZerMgq8Zb+T/1ddxhFJho54F5nCWYafOz8f4bL/+3EhpMt18kyv+XqRygTH8KeRsOt8 8Is75Mfe8yHWqIMoy3h28dDvyvhWr6szhri6PUeOuMb+gTwwVdMIw/otnaA/FugUPeo8 yiMXq6cGtRGe2NrBJLKn3gpX6XLQF1BZJDsarKjKi0Zb48mZgZ2KZYrfMeBqkwlSjYBC TnqwfN8aeOqH5t9Z8NgOP4nfEpPFAaOJ8c7k9+EWrab+miOxhbzgW2YGEpDqSB+3MWpJ uovw== 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=5I3MaPuQekUSX8QqcIQcRHhQNNfxc9JDDbmixsI4NJ4=; b=EuypzbIPaB4RhFidQN0ESnHlVbZKDmrh/X1tUjeUpQbznIN7GoHh0YyBKQrsJnInKV YLxD4ImFh6dAmpM/HiBYygeHZeaLVWJuaz6RrvI7CY6Om20kBIvf0sJcQA/T2lqeveC7 2amd6jhzmJJ9NOyJxTtq2G1UbUgEmzNpLood3ghLRdYQXpYD7CbPEt82nYpN0cjqWe9v DbQeRDkPub7QT4w7KygjZFs6efySO7T+Bvn6Pz5pbkzeN8cVoNnbH8LpPLr0mMDPLnRi 53ysVUsXDGm/G7WrZIaTak8WiXbpFVGRdE+N1xZ/ksWt2ZqMEyuNQwhVqTZSTheny1Ny 530g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlE5tgbo8BM3OUc7QldHLBbSqkKtBsmZBuEpC3a+rxU++uBmU85y aJ41bVGh5ufiStD1WWUBujOT5i+rEy7lAzzC4RInBk5Hrsk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdN+peWiQSeYJdQE7NMzFPzvK/iFgLJVmctqa/xY2rUQxs1jHM8dShQHmu78uHsVaAMlK2bLndyhx7eR9fpUjs= X-Received: by 2002:a24:8a85:: with SMTP id v127-v6mr4294440itd.98.1532006545780; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:22:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a4f:b442:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ted Lemon Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:21:45 -0400 Message-ID: To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f48b5505715a11d2" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:22:30 -0000 --000000000000f48b5505715a11d2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oops. My previous message was intended to reference this CFA, not the CFA for hmac. Babel with DTLS addresses the homenet use case, not Babel with HMAC. I'm not *objecting* to babel with HMAC=E2=80=94this is just the ver= sion that I need for the work I'm doing in homenet. On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. > > Thanks, > Donald > =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 > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --000000000000f48b5505715a11d2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oops.=C2=A0 =C2=A0My previous message was intended to refe= rence this CFA, not the CFA for hmac.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Babel with DTLS addresses= the homenet use case, not Babel with HMAC.=C2=A0 =C2=A0I'm not obje= cting=C2=A0to babel with HMAC=E2=80=94this is just the version that I n= eed for the work I'm doing in homenet.
=
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:43 AM, Donald East= lake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:
This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls.
Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit
longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you
think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also
welcome.

Thanks,
Donald
=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
=C2=A0Donald E. Eastlake 3rd=C2=A0 =C2=A0+1-508-333-2270 (cell)
=C2=A01424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA
=C2=A0d3e3e3@gmail.com

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

--000000000000f48b5505715a11d2-- From nobody Thu Jul 19 06:38:22 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF756130E9C; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:38:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 2xiJVFC8nsnc; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:38:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9CFB130EF7; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:38:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1532007496; bh=iLHUOAOKvzoPnSHPNG/5ec0bmMVW3w1u3QZhF4p2Zn4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=YSrgCPLhfzRXPe2EFCC+MFBND9KV4qgGDSzjh6ABK3NivKtGbgyEnuR9uQT0yc1t3 g0UcvOEsxYqfvnjgLDXHwifg+f3ltrAlI94WmJ4jiKDRmWq2yAkrQJrahXSA3GCD2S NsK0ASeo4PrEs2IJO/vZvAbN0WGfD4faFdcddQuP0TC77vTYUZf+DPcgRJDIJC/BhY E10cdu8HhVhkJOnB4JU+pGb9IQZv1cU+QJHHhp+3davufeU/QPb2XIauOxNfp7LDJQ WLcP1fgsn5fGzCpw1+V8xrqwKlLQOA/SXB3LW2P8lkgRsLd/3W0yECcQTpjQ5rYHmo wXwfMLlL2T8tw== To: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:38:04 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <87601b4a83.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:38:21 -0000 Donald Eastlake writes: > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. Since > this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit longer > than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this > draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. I support adoption. As Juliusz quoted me saying in his slides, I found the draft pleasant to read and straight forward to implement. And while some more work is needed on the text, I don't think there are any glaring deficiencies... -Toke From nobody Thu Jul 19 06:41:48 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF2F9130EA4; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:41:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 qj3rWzDRpnrb; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 681E9130E92; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:41:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB17221C79; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:41:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=V8H2Zq qKuItSPdJvUkVe9M7g812Av8wDPveJtGb3IYk=; b=VVc/p73h3yiIBWT6ZVNQaj hT35+2fbxushk9yCRXaW2dJ6Yb+p/yKv38muOCSf2zeM0gWu1XQL/vMQERM/8F98 ZHZgHOCreQUItFhDLT9DANqjUn9yu4twpaKSvfXSXxoqJNfdu0b0zPkFM96Uvsvx oOowppVape3UI28qgpqSzWTzz8iJRvJawkCrQKe8KpLSa3iAMTVGfccCAxp89INQ gD/wZmVGD51uIf/pPVxb+/w2BwErcY5jgecAFSdAKzPk4A0IbR/LeFhq4BFh6BUz 4anDYlt4AM+Yw0EdwkhjwBKCnJlh+tTGm1mQymi9W9v3AFK2Q3f2stx/6Wkqe4FA == X-ME-Proxy: X-ME-Sender: Received: from Russ (dhcp-86bb.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.134.187]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2D3A910268; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:41:43 -0400 (EDT) From: "Russ White" To: "'Donald Eastlake'" , "'Babel at IETF'" Cc: References: In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:41:42 -0400 Message-ID: <00bf01d41f66$3ad35280$b079f780$@riw.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQLQf1UN92gA256YaTeTBvSfB6/rz6KdzalQ Content-Language: en-us Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:41:46 -0000 > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit = longer than > usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this = draft should > be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. Support. /r From nobody Thu Jul 19 06:46:27 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767B3130E0D; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:46:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 in1kHzSLB4nz; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE780130E92; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:46:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1532007981; bh=BHDxahtRcU5EE2j3NiywfixhWKP24VnMiNF/LOyuiTQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=cOmmPdHb3dSDZYG05OeIanBQHLDn19vul2T7OW3Ei2o2YSqpfmz1hP61Mrrqujinu yrQVJcBSdgNrGqX1nzIwKrks4KJzD/E4x0AGj/gFrKQCsiByRz68doeS4o+BCx1Zfl 30pjW08eMC1fluDrWu4rmNiJq66tSy31SWpC31Qt1+RtlN4bVKzp6EJkIwU3mbPxv5 n5kjuW4Yy+Pg0oeRosDoWeUrq8P82U+aVhKASf3XQ3Xoa4a6gP0uWpLERc7XOjAeSJ 8V0CzrX5oHh/l511iaZOazQqJkQll6B/9anOuIrOVnAwHWkZocV3LUXzVSPutMMq4M R5ItrUVxI3Qnw== To: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:46:09 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <8736wf49um.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:46:26 -0000 Donald Eastlake writes: > This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. I support adoption. -Toke From nobody Thu Jul 19 07:07:00 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1DBA130EEB; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:06:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 7-w6lokfvKfk; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AAB1130EA1; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:06:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id z74-v6so4295939qkb.10; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:06:54 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3yrxCLpuv/AaL6Fl1gQ6Vh5iAlolxK0jEWvfhbZ2Osc=; b=UgAtHAzbT35mBRDYuHVi/jmL+oPNWFOGo8D/Crdfovz5oM51s6a7Go7RFvFPWmJ4Fg Q2leSznOLuqMtiuAXXIcsCx4Yh3T7IgLKRk/7/Horkhg8Nq/irJ4qSSbppt4N/EOXgYA NOvjTWbzb0Xuyp/BRoNVNxewZjO7HiOZ+LanZG5KN2X6GCPSQhlUoYacTP9z1CzRcKKR rabO0nGfNTOlRcqegUp008LtsznmHOha1glOflaEYuUIgAuBI9CmGEebfKKwr8Q9i9U1 fNs4KQbAgf5WrFQen8amfE4bmTomXGbP/I+PCDQqKBBifKQOyP45k4FG52AOZ5oGVwF4 ce9Q== 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3yrxCLpuv/AaL6Fl1gQ6Vh5iAlolxK0jEWvfhbZ2Osc=; b=bzbUQeZPHP06YaQxPj90cm+JHF1h7dL2dpxQdxeGcDNVyNVJga7V9BLt4eSgfxyjfr h8FaQXOlqypAPLY5Efc8DtfIC/IBBi2AUVII0HRHGtd1Ko1sd2JUP4/3eqgO6+8IxFv2 zhFLAfaIryVdQsrFDRRQ0st9LZmrQrhzDWduu/J4cHF9IC4iGcXz9Q/35NLEKAuR7Gz4 Rgd8TJ215VfQmDvkFuigafJLOGd47mBFeA7aGTZyI4GkIrbE+2wa99gZeP2Ex2nf400n AzWHCTT4KWcNWRbWsACf3NIPMrw0jqCYikks6++eU7fYr48EcTpMBVzcdU4kXRRw1ODX jiNA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEA+epmAsm7VgmYBQU6xMn7f6G+90m/Z5fHSbH6qC7PMkakoFaO F3SyhOoZYE0RUbGLn5x99bvnem6HMBrWXnqpSJA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpe6oivhkd5JRcNt5G74ryf2HKU/kcZOyAvPAQDa6Y/JHAAK+fkdHyRRxmBcYcNdgWNALQRBcxsXZhVlsksU6mE= X-Received: by 2002:a37:c40d:: with SMTP id d13-v6mr9069811qki.190.1532009213590; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:06:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <00bf01d41f66$3ad35280$b079f780$@riw.us> In-Reply-To: <00bf01d41f66$3ad35280$b079f780$@riw.us> From: Dave Taht Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:06:38 -0700 Message-ID: To: Russ White Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:06:58 -0000 support. On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:41 AM Russ White wrote: > > > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit longe= r than > > usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this draft= should > > be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. > > > > Support. > > /r > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619 From nobody Thu Jul 19 07:07:56 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD367130DC4; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:07:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 2DJUIdTcpnW1; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:07:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAB57129385; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:07:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id t79-v6so4307237qke.4; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:07:52 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BdnJ++UoB0wy9t/JrLZ0hLUIfjFzIEPg+lXhhokAx6M=; b=O1oGcvRAzvWQ1e8z8+32tZ3m6J6VyrJdLNN6dxljA+Qjn7DcWUqepkf3bzlh8TwPC+ RiItH9dLzMOJhjGzOjy+abCd5KiKYiqbAHrCphXToKeHA5xKv24h/k7bF+HdNQF0kHeq i4ws1hjFDBxDuBJAhzjkRAsawzpwGNiGokUnUiRHdPH6sH+1v5pcgHTHS0yJusgHTneu ihI7lkujmxu/EXBXWubA+qBTHKIzvdzl/Oub1Slm7sqwFU93688sSLCckLXQksaM+i00 KBO06CDwKM6vTAeezM95n0iBTxGp38EVCpaE70f6/rwlHYLow1ldVGvuflZOs8F2rP6R WE3w== 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BdnJ++UoB0wy9t/JrLZ0hLUIfjFzIEPg+lXhhokAx6M=; b=dTEZVQV24ZcfgEUWXM88/9r38AMjoVyZQDRqgo+U+xHvQlGv25xYIPcIcVLnHgOrCC +D3baQILJ8c/k9jSmKIskgE9SQy12MyeQpnDVNjeDVKqZyx77v3IokyRpCHWoCeHi3aI h6InzevAbrnNicNTv0dLqOae7Iz7r0pn3ZMSdp6+yNbVerXxyDecuHNqL9jVxlms86mA Hlrihiv/rzXZXbN+Gz3W1dWImmAwSxk4GlsKobFD1WT97tkeeRzkq0W27EYzoaZwaOOJ xq5/gDpC+bvYlFW/nxz6EHzOAGMhPZH9lywVWjUz8TPGNwToyjGY524g2NFlxpQCzbjn uzxw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFOI7YiecSgzSFd9FjUCHoot5uaZQRUBKlr15W8I1CxQgmFz0Y6 3YcvvbVHUVq1G8g9dazx0Euwg4XQcSg4cWSZJvE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpe0F8/X4PiY3EsOaEyvje1RmOrgjQeZ+SAysdHEC+BI2eh/Bxo9hmNqtcPMVpp7AtVQa483k7yOSYH1Kwhw1ag= X-Received: by 2002:a37:4d1:: with SMTP id 200-v6mr8848524qke.35.1532009271727; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:07:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8736wf49um.fsf@toke.dk> In-Reply-To: <8736wf49um.fsf@toke.dk> From: Dave Taht Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:07:40 -0700 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:07:55 -0000 On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:46 AM Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote: > > Donald Eastlake writes: > > > This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > > welcome. > > I support adoption. > > -Toke support. > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619 From nobody Thu Jul 19 07:31:12 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF72131031; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:30:47 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 i8f0-LdKEZH5; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:30:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECB95130F0D; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:30:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6JEU1CC031232 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:01 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6JEUEbQ027924; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:14 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F48EB22E; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id f6PAnn7xX6xr; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EC322EB22D; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:41 +0200 Message-ID: <871sbzcn72.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:01 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:30:14 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B50A069.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B50A076.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B50A069.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B50A076.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B50A069.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B50A076.001 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] IPR Poll for draft-ietf-babel-applicability X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:31:09 -0000 > This is a poll for any undisclosed IPR in this draft. The author of > the draft and anyone whose contribution to the draft had such IPR must > respond. Others should respond if they are aware of such IPR. I do not hold any IPR related to this draft. (It looks like I missed that, sorry.) -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Jul 19 08:27:41 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A486130DC7; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:27:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 ZeoUOYEq7IFd; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com (mail-wr1-x42b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5A6B130D7A; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:27:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id b15-v6so8475803wrv.10; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:27:37 -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=TXG4H30An3w1WrzPA0Zv65r4dFXoGb4SpV2oJD8lUOA=; b=C2YjQd1KnSDHwxrn8LPVFlL8stlCdDC7o7jZZxFwMWd6uvHHhvxrUoOrDAlofGrVYo 77o5Whc0uMixM73idk2ZixjuSjJE+gZ9ODHeXDw1sv5TUWlvlJ8B80uuvJhdgLKZ44WB e9NVYxHzBJkwYywAtQ4XVsn4zwZBkj0Ocr6M0shDGkZFf0r72m8zAXt0ySNcFEhUhk4t Ei07OeqRQOmR7pP8tFixkZBFM8TI8+iDBY+5Ct6RHd0iDfvDEXNcSaKT0tY3uXBHAzY4 OHK/1XEGfyI9PolSWR0LFTbeM7zslgCP7gqPgRkFYZ600h9ryvXFrk9r4F5VSwAXY4yk BRjw== 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=TXG4H30An3w1WrzPA0Zv65r4dFXoGb4SpV2oJD8lUOA=; b=GQodTN0sJWQvdLidhI+MKboz52XFFdlOSmFYaUHM/N7bhcpCj6Yq9EkA1QuQqz1p9u i64kjwu47UGhhE7iqS1FsHDv6YhMIRXJbTcyFoLwu0PQiTrxXPUsfRWRYS1cAKfb83yH 73txBV24YusdHr2hrErrBaxQuUJ38vcxWjHev7ddxj6f8sBJZrrnPTQdknV1uTQalom6 N0Q/TBE9b0AghkTjtME0fvMGiWdpkVs5fFHSsul9lZcPSzAUJ+LTghhL0J1dK6/NsFoD cmyKll+ceFOxbyqCTEMbKApdB3nQJKuf2m3URhV+32hKbj6oFZt4JKoLeaa3HQr0Zj9l a5qg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFc2zkAFOgy9sj/g4SSzt1i2aW0asWR/TS4v+Fo46NhKqaf83NJ AG+vimh1c8QJbfM8wdbTaE6dtN8HJSRmxOSVHXs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdxOdL0dKLrAb9OfvYFG9GOlDJ010vp06lUhazUHcidwCnso22XvXXIV7AVkQlJLAELHtpE5eZnKUz19R2Hdb4= X-Received: by 2002:adf:f001:: with SMTP id j1-v6mr7437350wro.260.1532014056310; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:27:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:adf:a414:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:27:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <00bf01d41f66$3ad35280$b079f780$@riw.us> From: Tim Wicinski Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:27:35 -0400 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: Russ White , Donald Eastlake , babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009e0cfc05715bd157" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 15:27:40 -0000 --0000000000009e0cfc05715bd157 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ive read and support adoption of the HMAC draft. Tim On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > support. > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:41 AM Russ White wrote: > > > > > > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than > > > usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this > draft should > > > be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. > > > > > > > > Support. > > > > /r > > > > _______________________________________________ > > babel mailing list > > babel@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > > > > -- > > Dave T=C3=A4ht > CEO, TekLibre, LLC > http://www.teklibre.com > Tel: 1-669-226-2619 > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --0000000000009e0cfc05715bd157 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ive read and support adoption of the HMAC draft.

<= /div>
Tim


On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Dave Taht <dave= .taht@gmail.com> wrote:
sup= port.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:41 AM Rus= s White <russ@riw.us> wrote:
>
>
> > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit= longer than
> > usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this= draft should
> > be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome.
>
> <wg cochair hat off>
>
> Support.
>
> /r
>
> _______________________________________________
> babel mailing list
> babel@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel=



--

Dave T=C3=A4ht
CEO, TekLibre, LLC
ht= tp://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-669-226-2619

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

--0000000000009e0cfc05715bd157-- From nobody Thu Jul 19 11:10:51 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6CF2131145 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.31 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 FUnujcUa6AfD for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-in7.apple.com (mail-out7.apple.com [17.151.62.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52ACE131140 for ; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1532023841; x=2395937441; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=i8pEonWisXGsKuN4cFvJHPd93dibY7OutltZnqhtPFI=; b=WTebkUMGiD55ONKeYfKKsmZz2s9MWlNzCi/+FEABgiU116j5svNrD0BG4qSo6q6d BmF6xktbBm8hjdSvxO9F1O3x63X07ViCoQ/J7Sbf+9AyMRbj6YLu90r+BoaqUjKm Wy+uGZCpli0yvSVQErDSa54eU3jztl5JScFAcvfn8WghSP/N5wOxcDcX10dDVzLj PuM9cqddGcCwiASrKM8w9BocNU/wnNJgT4cibgBmB7zShBJoRBxSH/BHzmSgFqA9 qgQHMFhmlpNncUUMMAVfSq16IUmee3mLmjs69gH+KDYh/o38xL+TG90D07dK5Iq0 xZb3e0jQJYOAID080v2q0w==; X-AuditID: 11973e16-6d9ff7000000740c-ea-5b50d420e114 Received: from ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com (ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com [17.40.76.7]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in7.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 39.73.29708.024D05B5; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_LHwqZuV1a7cx/bti42ysuQ)" Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com [17.128.115.216]) by ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPS id <0PC400638L5RS380@ma1-mtap-s03.corp.apple.com>; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from process_viserion-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PC400800KRRQI00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Va-A: X-Va-T-CD: 5849e56780e9b915ed7e1028c762dea6 X-Va-E-CD: f6e6dab25929837112606003927c22a6 X-Va-R-CD: 7b981a1c5f5be3f3d4ce52896b6447f4 X-Va-CD: 0 X-Va-ID: 31783bc0-5468-44f9-a357-b5a28a9a5b40 X-V-A: X-V-T-CD: 5849e56780e9b915ed7e1028c762dea6 X-V-E-CD: f6e6dab25929837112606003927c22a6 X-V-R-CD: 7b981a1c5f5be3f3d4ce52896b6447f4 X-V-CD: 0 X-V-ID: bae12b52-f3d1-45fe-a16f-ee45a06d2fe8 Received: from process_milters-daemon.nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) id <0PC400D00L5PST00@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-19_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Scanner-Instance: nwk-grpmailp-qapp16.corp.apple.com-10000_instance1 Received: from [17.235.59.137] by nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.3.20180614 64bit (built Jun 14 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0PC400KH1L4TTB50@nwk-mmpp-sz13.apple.com>; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 11:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dschinazi@apple.com From: David Schinazi Message-id: <6D4C44D4-32BA-411A-B667-1725DE9DF2C7@apple.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:10:04 -0400 In-reply-to: Cc: Dave Taht , Russ White , Donald Eastlake , babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF To: Tim Wicinski References: <00bf01d41f66$3ad35280$b079f780$@riw.us> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprEKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUiqOHDrqt4JSDa4MVyFovTvbdYLLYs6max OLhd02LPxpMsFg+7TSymtW1mdmDz2DnrLrvHkiU/mTxOP5zMHsAcxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJVx 535EwULdiomLTzA3MJ5X72Lk5JAQMJH49qGTqYuRi0NIYB+TxJXm/YwgCV4BQYkfk++xgNjM AmESZyd/Y4co2sgk0XPzHAuE08UksfRxEyvEKHaJP792sEDY2hJzHx2Cs/9Pfgpnf5q5C6qe S2LB1tNQtq7Ewhcw9WwS608sYYKwtSQ+rT7MCGPvWbcQzj77YwYbhM0pcf7LRHYIW0eif+4n sDlCAp1MEvseukDEsyUaN32CmhkscX1LG9Q3Xxkl3sz+AdYgLCAt0XXhLtBBHBxsQAsOrDEC MXkFbCSm/A2CqPCSeNtxCmwMi4CqxPvnS8BO4AQaOfV3DzgUmQXmMEpM+70cLCECVLTq/lOo Xd1MEmfubIJ6UlGif80htgmMCrOQQnsWUmjPAtrNLKAuMWVKLkRYW+LJuwusELaaxMLfi5iQ xRcwsq1iFMpNzMzRzcwz10ssKMhJ1UvOz93ECEpE0+3EdjA+XGV1iFGAg1GJh5fBNSBaiDWx rLgy9xCjNAeLkjjv8Y1AIYH0xJLU7NTUgtSi+KLSnNTiQ4xMHJxSDYzNqzLLftROXfp/WdT1 Setd9zkZTjlfzqI49XJC1lat/mPCSy8/Cli71itT6Wq9++5ZHhw7r+SeOskokh306uaUFZpm 6d3u9149rztcsPXxrq+rD/nvudL0LCPidXwh6/+uqfNmPf1zbeosAcXpy9cxHF/wYf8751Y1 MSZre6XvWdnPYrlkLWavUmIpzkg01GIuKk4EAKEqYR0lAwAA Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 18:10:50 -0000 --Boundary_(ID_LHwqZuV1a7cx/bti42ysuQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable I support WG adoption of draft-do-babel-hmac. I found the document clear and the protocol simple. I haven't implemented it yet, but look forward to doing so. David > On Jul 19, 2018, at 11:27, Tim Wicinski wrote: >=20 > Ive read and support adoption of the HMAC draft. >=20 > Tim >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Dave Taht > wrote: > support. > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:41 AM Russ White > wrote: > > > > > > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit = longer than > > > usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this = draft should > > > be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. > > > > > > > > Support. > > > > /r > > > > _______________________________________________ > > babel mailing list > > babel@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel = >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 >=20 > Dave T=C3=A4ht > CEO, TekLibre, LLC > http://www.teklibre.com > Tel: 1-669-226-2619 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel = >=20 > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel --Boundary_(ID_LHwqZuV1a7cx/bti42ysuQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable I = support WG adoption of draft-do-babel-hmac.
I found = the document clear and the protocol simple.
I = haven't implemented it yet, but look forward to doing so.

David


On Jul = 19, 2018, at 11:27, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

Ive read and support adoption of the HMAC draft.

Tim


On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:06 AM, = Dave Taht <dave..taht@gmail.com> wrote:
support.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:41 AM = Russ White <russ@riw.us> wrote:
>
>
> > This message begins a WG adoption call for = draft-do-babel-hmac.
> > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a = bit longer than
> > usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think = this draft should
> > be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome.
>
> <wg cochair hat off>
>
> Support.
>
> /r
>
> _______________________________________________
> babel mailing list
> babel@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel



-- =

Dave T=C3=A4ht
CEO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-669-226-2619

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

_______________________________________________
babel = mailing list
babel@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel

= --Boundary_(ID_LHwqZuV1a7cx/bti42ysuQ)-- From nobody Thu Jul 19 13:52:30 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB86130E08; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:52:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 7lprh7-2cT0B; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAACC130E2A; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049459.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049459.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w6JKk3kO009829; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:23 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049459.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2kb02xb9ra-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:23 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w6JKqLwe024920; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:22 -0400 Received: from zlp30486.vci.att.com (zlp30486.vci.att.com [135.47.91.177]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w6JKqIqT024817; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:18 -0400 Received: from zlp30486.vci.att.com (zlp30486.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30486.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 55C314048B3D; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 20:52:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.156]) by zlp30486.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 4536D4048B3C; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 20:52:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.76]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAG.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.156]) with mapi id 14.03.0408.000; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:18 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF CC: "babel-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) Thread-Index: AQHUH16blQDTdTsOfEu0M73zB76ZbqSWz8AAgAA19LA= Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 20:52:17 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE411AB@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <87601b4a83.fsf@toke.dk> In-Reply-To: <87601b4a83.fsf@toke.dk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.252.176] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-07-19_07:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=726 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1807190216 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 20:52:29 -0000 > Donald Eastlake writes: >=20 > > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. Since > > this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit longer > > than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you think this > > draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also welcome. I support. Barbara From nobody Thu Jul 19 16:04:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF3A4130E42; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:04:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 be9q2mjfFXlK; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13311130E03; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:04:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049462.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w6JKjNmR010200; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:58 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049462.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2kb1hjgsfg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:58 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w6JKqw5k025510; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:58 -0400 Received: from zlp30485.vci.att.com (zlp30485.vci.att.com [135.47.91.178]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w6JKqq4m025427; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:52 -0400 Received: from zlp30485.vci.att.com (zlp30485.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30485.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id AADA540002DA; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 20:52:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.155]) by zlp30485.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 9A50740002CB; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 20:52:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.76]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.155]) with mapi id 14.03.0408.000; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 16:52:52 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF CC: "babel-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) Thread-Index: AQHUH14wsoJDOI9gx0KaaE36xPm//KSW0gOAgAA0DAA= Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 20:52:52 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE411EE@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <8736wf49um.fsf@toke.dk> In-Reply-To: <8736wf49um.fsf@toke.dk> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.252.176] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-07-19_07:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=693 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1807190216 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 23:04:03 -0000 > Donald Eastlake writes: >=20 > > This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. > > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > > welcome. I support. Barbara From nobody Sun Jul 22 02:29:49 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0E83130E81; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 02:29:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info 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 XXOgKEVqCF6e; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 02:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2BF5130E79; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 02:29:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1532251783; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=1749; bh=HnN3diPHU63QJpQuW1OFUQTmjteHj+rzK0cQnHpctKE=; b=gEFrnKW92Ox/HXb0L8Nwg/kfrYEXdqCIcQnwGBMa4uG10KyetnkSfcx9/eozbegr RYYrYtWeX0YZ9GRaPvpiVo4xtC+MPVgyQ1iSHjKEYfq6y7fyzBStEd+tbA+8vFTttaI OV8S5V6vF5vEXzEcx9UD98Tb5FK/aeZRBmCyJ+Po= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1532251783039722.0253133196943; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 02:29:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:29:43 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: "Babel at IETF" , Message-ID: <164c152bf7d.f1cebac1254304.6061663386997033206@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 09:29:48 -0000 ---- On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 09:05:01 +0100 Matthieu Boutier wrote ---- [...] > > (Is it correct that the model in this specification treats 0/0 same as any other source prefix, it is just the encoding convention that 0/0 is always represented with the absence of the sub-TLV? If so, it could be helpful to acknowledge this point in the document for clarity.) > > Thanks, this was not said explicitly in the protocol operation. Hello all. This is an comment for the whole working group, not just Matthieu. The quote above discusses a property of the draft-ietf-babel-source-specific WG document, in that its protocol encoding potentially provides one way to represent a route that is not source-specific, and 6126bis by definition provides another. This document contains normative text that specifies which of the two potential encodings must be used on the wire, so that the implementations remain compatible. Having studied the document, on 28 May 2018 I suggested that the normative text is not clear enough in this regard. Matthieu agreed and on 2 June 2018 pushed a commit that among other changes elaborated how this document encoding relates to the encoding of 6126bis: https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/801c205e5d9a9cdd22f6d51ba7ca45f28ffbf81f The document remained unchanged until 28 June 2018, when Juliusz committed a change reverting this clarification in this document, without providing any comments in the commit message or on the mailing list: https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/03c04b619eecf51011f7e0549ef1e7bb330680da I am spelling those details on the list as they have an effect on the quality of a specific deliverable by the Babel WG. -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Sun Jul 22 02:43:10 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFF9F130E83; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 02:43:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=toke.dk 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 8H_UJR4Y1tMf; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 02:43:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [IPv6:2001:470:dc45:1000::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13F74130E79; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 02:43:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1532252581; bh=zfT8sICdIL2GdXu/vBNWg//yq+6QJiTeW6UBXTG58kQ=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=E+sZDj1Ie3VopinwmvouABOl6ccNrnj3S26Rjo3DUI+xn4V/JXmIi2GsPFOGtCQnz ZBjStJItRkVwXOSWGjU4ing+vcdulTFcsGefpdRkBz5NDwuDOAn3LZi46QGtHDU3r5 vYu7IU6abK4qfYEfhdJ5A7MMizCERWr1YNZlsrpjwiPcVbvRevNHFm8+n12xIAyArn zYlHSneKgTLr3CAwgrY3uoWLfOQUre0Kr37PkQJlvcigDrXBsb3hXd2/UR3AuuJ33O 6hisB46BE0O5Ljml28RHtFuT64YHu9Hyx79+zqaLjcC6TN5JxBSjNwizKi4awSqjiw qIVb4PazaABgA== To: Denis Ovsienko , Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <164c152bf7d.f1cebac1254304.6061663386997033206@ovsienko.info> References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> <164c152bf7d.f1cebac1254304.6061663386997033206@ovsienko.info> Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:42:53 +0200 X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <874lgr4ndu.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 09:43:08 -0000 Denis Ovsienko writes: > ---- On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 09:05:01 +0100 Matthieu Boutier wrote ---- > [...] > > > > (Is it correct that the model in this specification treats 0/0 > > > same as any other source prefix, it is just the encoding > > > convention that 0/0 is always represented with the absence of the > > > sub-TLV? If so, it could be helpful to acknowledge this point in > > > the document for clarity.) > > > > Thanks, this was not said explicitly in the protocol operation. > > Hello all. > > This is an comment for the whole working group, not just Matthieu. > > The quote above discusses a property of the > draft-ietf-babel-source-specific WG document, in that its protocol > encoding potentially provides one way to represent a route that is not > source-specific, and 6126bis by definition provides another. This > document contains normative text that specifies which of the two > potential encodings must be used on the wire, so that the > implementations remain compatible. > > Having studied the document, on 28 May 2018 I suggested that the > normative text is not clear enough in this regard. Matthieu agreed and > on 2 June 2018 pushed a commit that among other changes elaborated how > this document encoding relates to the encoding of 6126bis: > > https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/801c205e5d9a9cdd22f6d51ba7ca45f28ffbf81f > > The document remained unchanged until 28 June 2018, when Juliusz > committed a change reverting this clarification in this document, > without providing any comments in the commit message or on the mailing > list: > > https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/03c04b619eecf51011f7e0549ef1e7bb330680da Eh? That latter commit looks like a purely stylistic change. The text still says this: "A node obeying this specification MUST NOT send a TLV with a zero-length source prefix: instead, it sends a TLV with no source prefix sub-TLV. Conversely, an extended implementation MUST interpret an unextended TLV as carrying a source prefix of zero length. Taken together, these properties ensure interoperability between the original and extended protocols (see below)." > I am spelling those details on the list as they have an effect on the > quality of a specific deliverable by the Babel WG. No, they don't... -Toke From nobody Sun Jul 22 03:36:09 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A2B130EA1 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 03:36:08 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 MJ8wFAwDuLXL for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 03:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8820A130DC8 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 03:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6MAZDYK030025 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 12:35:13 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE78EB22E for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 12:36:03 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id xnfmyTP__jQB for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 12:36:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0CF6AEB22D for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 12:36:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 12:36:02 +0200 Message-ID: <87fu0bd0bx.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: babel@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <874lgr4ndu.fsf@toke.dk> References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> <164c152bf7d.f1cebac1254304.6061663386997033206@ovsienko.info> <874lgr4ndu.fsf@toke.dk> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 22 Jul 2018 12:35:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B545DE1.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B545DE1.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B545DE1.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:36:08 -0000 >> Having studied the document, on 28 May 2018 I suggested that the >> normative text is not clear enough in this regard. > "A node obeying this specification MUST NOT send a TLV with a > zero-length source prefix: instead, it sends a TLV with no source prefix > sub-TLV. Conversely, an extended implementation MUST interpret an > unextended TLV as carrying a source prefix of zero length. Taken > together, these properties ensure interoperability between the original > and extended protocols (see below)." Thank you, Toke. Denis, I believe that we are saying everything that needs to be said in the paragraph above. Please spell out exactly what you think is missing. To be very clear: don't give me stylistic suggestions, say something like "The draft needs to say that 2 + 2 SHOULD be equal to 4, and it doesn't." -- Juliusz From nobody Sun Jul 22 05:29:05 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6C77130DC1; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 05:29:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ovsienko.info 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 dl4OdFMALaCr; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 05:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sender-of-o51.zoho.com (sender-of-o51.zoho.com [135.84.80.216]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2013130DD0; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 05:29:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1532262532; s=zohomail; d=ovsienko.info; i=denis@ovsienko.info; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; l=6126; bh=DxZ4SGY5cBo9t/5HXAQZ4mMmumo33pFH2WQLbs9vmEk=; b=BJ+BvObgsLEb6cTKnHtK7/yH3rcw8Xqv2SGcamznvOowMMxfkcSYYp5FVlqu4Zwf 8CGuV7eoW7LT2potG7TUltmfT8+4Q+19zsZz9WkdRz4c6HIoY3ByfByHVMF6mAXtE/3 mASMDNxMFy+dhZ991JilgNmAGIyrLeUzoZLtLYV0= Received: from mail.zoho.com by mx.zohomail.com with SMTP id 1532262531859683.3032684435532; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 05:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:28:51 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: "Babel at IETF" , "babel-chairs" Message-ID: <164c1f6c305.de4e0cfa319563.445636890330531708@ovsienko.info> In-Reply-To: <87d0x6u1yd.wl-jch@irif.fr> References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> <163cabe6d49.1115744068931.3357457871401802835@ovsienko.info> <87d0x6u1yd.wl-jch@irif.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: Medium User-Agent: Zoho Mail X-Mailer: Zoho Mail Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 12:29:03 -0000 Another comment that I consider important for this WGLC and the whole Babel WG work. ---- On Mon, 04 Jun 2018 14:16:10 +0100 Juliusz Chroboczek wrote ---- > > Please correct me if the following interpretation is wrong. There is > > a deployed fleet of RFC 6126 devices and it is not going to disappear > > immediately. There is going to be a deployed fleet of SS-extended > > devices. When the two kinds randomly meet in the wild and > > source-specific routes start to propagate, the network can randomly > > break or degrade. > > > Acknowledging the problem in a document is a good start. But ending up > > with a design that fails to fail safe looks wrong. > > Babel development tries, to the extent possible, to meet the needs of our > users. When we decided to go with the mandatory bits (and therefore break > compatibility with 6126), I spoke with a number of users of Babel, some of > them in the live, some of them by e-mail. I then explained the transition > plan on the babel-users mailing list, no less than three times. About the mailing list and the users. People well familiar with mailing lists know that lack of negative feedback on the mailing list does not mean everything is good. In partucular, I have been on babel-users for 6.5 years, and I have learned that a typical subscriber is either a network protocols hacker, or a community network operator, or both at once. For the pre-IETF Babel that was perfectly OK, and having most of the enthusiasts on a single mailing list indeed gave an impression that things will not go terribly wrong. If the network breaks, many subscribers can troubleshoot and sometimes even fix it. But, first, not all Babel users are on the list. Some people are happy to enable a protocol and leave it running without joining any mailing lists. Like, for instance, OSPF -- its typical users do not join dedicated mailing lists or hack OSPF internals. They just follow the router configuration guide and move on to the next task. You would like to be able to coordinate the migration with 100% of the user base, but this is impossible. Second, the IETF Babel is intended, through the implementers, exactly for end users, not network protocol hackers. When a random end user finds an access point that has an "enable Babel routing protocol" checkbox, their reasonable expectation will be either the feature works, or it fails safe. Or they will just randomly flip each available checkbox forth and back to see what happens. What actually happens will depend in which year the access point was flashed and with which implementation, and what other implementations happen to be in the network at the time. Ironically, if IETF Babel becomes a success, it will motivate end users to enable as many Babel routers as they find around, and the probability of 6126bis source-specific running into a plain 6126 will increase, which will demotivate end users from using Babel. This is a negative feedback loop, in other words, 6126bis with version 2 works against the success of this routing protocol. This protocol design lesson has already been learned elsewhere, and well more than once. > There were no objections. Our users are worried about a flag day, since > they are unable to update all of their routers in a timely manner. > However, they are not worried about an orderly transition: > > - the next version of babeld will not break compatibility without an > explicit option; > - future versions of babeld will have a per-interface flag called > "rfc6126-compatible" that will cause babeld to remain compatible with > deployed implementations. > > Of course, I have not spoken with every single user of babeld. However, > I am confident that the above transition plan is the best we can do > without splitting the community into "version 2" and "version 3", which at > this stage would be tantamount to suicide. About the protocol version and transition. Migrating from version 2 to version 3 is expectedly complicated. A valid version 2 will disregard version 3, consequently, version 3 protocol will have a fail-safe property. The cost and complexity of this migration are known beforehand and the migration can be planned. Indeed the most affected would be the user base of version 2, but that is a one-time pain. This looks like a classic known-good solution. Moreover, the current revision of 6126bis has inherited the following text from RFC 7557: "The version number in the Babel header should only be increased if the new version is not backwards compatible with the original protocol." Section 6 of draft-ietf-babel-source-specific specifically says this is exactly the case. Doing the migration on the base of version 2, if done carefully, will indeed make the migration easier for the existing version 2 user base (given they are in contact and willing to coordinate). But the resulting two Babel version 2 dialects will not have the ability to fail safe, and the place for a backfire will remain for years. This looks like gambling at somebody else's risk. So, there is a problem and there are two ways to deal with it. Let me simplify it below to make it easier to see the difference: * Make it easy in the short-term for network protocol hackers and difficult in the long-term for the general public. * Make it difficult in the short-term for network protocol hackers and easy in the long term for the general public. A part of the problem is, 6126bis does not acknowledge the problem at all. The least 6126bis must have is an explanation of this protocol design choice, whatever it is. Besides that, it would also be reasonable to expect, in a Standards Track document, a design choice that will be good for years ahead. Before this issue with 6126bis gets properly addressed in the first place, it is impossible to conclude whether draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (and, for that matter, 6126bis itself, which has been in a WGLC since October 2017) is technically sound for publication. Thank you for reading. -- Denis Ovsienko From nobody Sun Jul 22 10:52:26 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A999130FCA; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:52:24 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 ldoBn0asSWEN; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:52:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B813E130FC5; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 10:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6MHpScD023048; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:51:28 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E372AEB22D; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:52:18 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 0Jcl4dvlugr4; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:52:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from trurl.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0839DEB200; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:52:17 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:52:17 +0200 Message-ID: <878t632m5q.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Denis Ovsienko Cc: "Babel at IETF" , "babel-chairs" In-Reply-To: <164c1f6c305.de4e0cfa319563.445636890330531708@ovsienko.info> References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> <163cabe6d49.1115744068931.3357457871401802835@ovsienko.info> <87d0x6u1yd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <164c1f6c305.de4e0cfa319563.445636890330531708@ovsienko.info> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:51:28 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B54C420.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B54C420.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B54C420.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 17:52:25 -0000 > Thank you for reading. Our pleasure, as always. Denis, I've read your mail twice, and I do not understanding what you are proposing. Could you please succintly and clearly explain what it is that you recommend that the working group should do? -- Juliusz From nobody Sun Jul 22 19:26:25 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75215130DF4; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:26:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 WTKb6m3ETJzi; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x232.google.com (mail-qk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E19F9130DD2; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:26:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x232.google.com with SMTP id b5-v6so9323929qkg.6; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:26:20 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1jLMYdbQ01NL4iwIFbsBt7l2IZEvnBWuu9/qPJlZyuA=; b=WroG6dQkZlAwmE41JgGW26V86dyY04BqiXia0IuKOEXgqW87Ofqdbh8Cr0o+ohKQYf dHiT3osbFsiINKOGouSRqxwJjVAtM8iIIgW+EKDsoqi3vC1MYKdEbrdlI0/Rb4C0L0N0 1btR8egSexj9EV7DxDYvK0w+FyglJMdydOutyZ+WZ8Q9AjwgkI+GSiDA2WRJhYvtNVeg x002wy1XR3N4DFf17DiVKA+VseyOLp33N3jPb2x1+j4U3xM3p3SImVDf8cqVzeyLOlmK oJOf5WN5iP74zb3K9gKrxGAvM0lUqdXwJ188bbdolSn9JCLVi1U5Y/niXGhvNuj6XC4g x4SQ== 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1jLMYdbQ01NL4iwIFbsBt7l2IZEvnBWuu9/qPJlZyuA=; b=c5VVlxQUSvdy98xPm4p+ggroPcDOxxX0X1P0bvBU+mEuqKt6IFoOtQq1USOROEr8VM Jc7Ag3LJz+GSKG/99jbviiGE241GSYY20+3vSvaAlp9rATgrlvFK7ZQdJZgrBeDl8Ktg iNnDkjBAP73pFfTO6jboGvxCg3dTH3RLzyowexwvdmSkpStosaZXgGTS3PNFfrbx/L/p JffQuUgb0OJ2Y/aoXUKR0HkBlRaPjwFiFxoOs0x9+rnX8inGbvtl+hNKwpi4ViYllVvb z4dwEMhPg+a5UHow7Y8S0DwEtvJJrD+3bEFJljWaVugK2F2hEI2rmLldCVY4WC9h8nhR SGTg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlE68PzittYxe9F5LinyzXhaFnzlCeVdgNnAM9HpbGfCgQL2Pnd6 VcSXpWEDAWMIuZ9GTLWDfugmB+qjQ7I7iRuYumE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdlkBkAnHVnQMjhXIQDYKy9KLqqhW9Kz0LfPXXXtkuBNNUgXYyYPzCa8TAqyRK+R4vqdZW/fmlAcDuN7XZ3L0Q= X-Received: by 2002:a37:210a:: with SMTP id h10-v6mr9726226qkh.263.1532312779950; Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:26:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> <163cabe6d49.1115744068931.3357457871401802835@ovsienko.info> <87d0x6u1yd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <164c1f6c305.de4e0cfa319563.445636890330531708@ovsienko.info> <878t632m5q.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: <878t632m5q.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Dave Taht Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 19:26:08 -0700 Message-ID: To: Juliusz Chroboczek Cc: Denis Ovsienko , babel-chairs@ietf.org, Babel at IETF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 02:26:23 -0000 In my deployed babel network... I am dreading the source specific change. But I've been prepared to have that flag day for three years, and the ietf processes make me crazy. I have no less than 6 deployed versions of babel in the field (and I mean, in the field, in trees, and on rooftops), spread across 40+ routers, it will take me months or years to replace them all... and the deployment strategy juliusz has outlined is acceptable. In part due to the lack of a good ipv6 address distribution mechanism (slight dig), very little of my network is ipv6 enabled, and the sad way I assign source specific addresses now (ip route show | grep "from" | pickaddresseslikeslaacdid), ipv6 source specific connectivity either comes back on the reflash/reboot or it doesn't - and ipv4 keeps working. The ipv6 stuff has largely not escaped the lab due to the delays in standardization. due to the address assignment problem, I think very few babel installations are using ipv6 all that much, except in non source specific ways. Let's just get it over with and get the documents AND code out there already. openwrt 18.06-rc2 is out now and it would be great to start testing al the new stuff before it goes final. Warn people in the README. If this were OSPF or BGP or ISIS I'd care more, but babel's deployment is at least 3 orders of magnitude smaller than those. ship it. Move on. On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:52 AM Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > > > Thank you for reading. > > Our pleasure, as always. > > Denis, I've read your mail twice, and I do not understanding what you are > proposing. Could you please succintly and clearly explain what it is tha= t > you recommend that the working group should do? > > -- Juliusz > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619 From nobody Mon Jul 23 05:19:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3548E130E64 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:19:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -17.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 mY3y-DBN3EG4 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x533.google.com (mail-pg1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48618130E17 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x533.google.com with SMTP id y5-v6so272431pgv.1 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:19:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d7V1Xcmb1n9rv/2Wugv5mTiziggPZv+MCd41ARr88zE=; b=vnxChM2DiXBv8XAk/1l8hd7zB5cVogTrLRxdojOP50SBFt56e6vFAbXZ0bYFvaEVC+ daJMV9fXUsml8gOPMcIDwrxTcTNZHTyC/oEknfcbE40xTR6I9ogeJpsdIO7YfIi3+2cp 6F2hLgxfOkUj0p4Oo77B/pVWNzMvrNJvDQfqWLPs/cUJkfay4+o83Mki72aGcdJSN6OC FMWjxDul0gSGbPh63LpYGJEuWhYBL2bpCyjey+WsJNkK65WNMzLXoMZhnHgWSebhJ4cw 2s5Y9cNSlf83XU3ms9i+5f4C+7ID81HNuI/IhPGL4QlOsWCQoUIZhDO5KeqfHL+PLOAk g0Hw== 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=d7V1Xcmb1n9rv/2Wugv5mTiziggPZv+MCd41ARr88zE=; b=CeNxRq15M0aV/6J8bRBcfDKX5QPIgdBs5PdwqeUIvs+XNk9HvegK01x9ody+MMNKVg KZ3+4gGJYckOcBV+O+cdYHcBtyTqjakC6Pa0Tx00+mUDLZ70kCXMGdLW6yBOfpUySVdf 606RsxvpbxGRBH0ywgFrcnAtQvzxYkLagMqutfhbcMujzVX4yQXGmDjxYpt70yqZVET7 bR9eYV/CYGI/nGwk+4KvNmZ7d//BOeRIKbKYn0VEFk2a5Vu3fml3NhR6+FB3Dg8AKRzB l8MkrDqbrKpdKl2BprjBHl7LCwy7DsO0b4E97b13aJ4cwBKZgOOAPkSkwxbixRtBIsdm Dn2w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGH9xQDizgcj53Z5QdLjpiF3iyvHzPh8uy9DJatLE3r4QEiQ9Y6 iCErX+v7bevV9STKjFJy1jX04SPqkmnN3zBNOz+IDQGljnI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpe/T6ErhIONqqbBxId0JJZ1smCq0FUbD7dWQw5NEi6H8KNQvw7kS7CwH3jOLvMbJOG4dSgsnnT1cwqvMZTrL8o= X-Received: by 2002:a63:5660:: with SMTP id g32-v6mr12203870pgm.227.1532348353573; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:19:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Gabriel Kerneis Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:18:37 +0200 Message-ID: To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004a08700571a9a7ff" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 12:19:16 -0000 --0000000000004a08700571a9a7ff Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 2:47 PM Donald Eastlake wrote: > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. > I support adoption of this draft. Gabriel --0000000000004a08700571a9a7ff Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 2:47 PM Donald Eastlake <<= a href=3D"mailto:d3e3e3@gmail.com">d3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:
This message beg= ins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac.
Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit
longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you
think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also
welcome.

I support adoption of this d= raft.=C2=A0

Gabriel
--0000000000004a08700571a9a7ff-- From nobody Mon Jul 23 05:30:23 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F9E3130E64 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:30:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -17.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 6FbNDhy3Wg8A for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x52a.google.com (mail-pg1-x52a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECC9C130E7C for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52a.google.com with SMTP id x5-v6so285027pgp.7 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:30:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vBSD/mlB5Wix5zz53BcpYEE0lTb0UTt1olUZLY+q8YQ=; b=KispZS9hWMzJ1mDtsHFEvUCq7ViU6qzryq9NbZ7v+05ZQEK6BzOlubcChuJzqM6YHq +q4iphJs18cpZS4LN89io9rasmjRuIwDjxtYE/SV5KuPZl7gtjd2lIqz1bnUC5zuJVBs iV4Itp4VJ1iZj60mz7z5vJjUvIAQlYbFc9CgcTii9pCHgXZSs25ovf02yzFGh76JqUFp jIQgyiIAob+IOdjFzzUbxZWYh8F1pi3gZAF8WRpMyGr4UGakkxrnJgOBRuI7sW4PY/hH fhLiRFFUEGcQIgAJebZHUhDysDHwrlpLrhjkzy61cGHZI0UvHViFn1l7iy3TMLJ5NIIn AuFA== 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=vBSD/mlB5Wix5zz53BcpYEE0lTb0UTt1olUZLY+q8YQ=; b=F+879QLfcvziwq9HkHB8j9qmkW0vnYkASmLWLlTGrfAlO1/oc3gFlgHcYjChV3/01G iURRxHnUJjbBH9XyWRWy/f+vNqQBmzgCnizyQ6ye1tqXJ3jUcBoCU3vfaoQ901A3dFYc LpTzHqCSJ/3PeasiXux57JK8jVbyjk2CHvSBcS4dteabWkM8A+RvVpXpPbA1HJZYwISU +Z+e0AYGZny2IjQMGkRAK5psN9aUga4Jp27I43+2malkF8afPqxR4BzSxN/mOJGqjOJw +T9iWon6atW85pqKKRqeNLBXrK8CQilnPhhBkyClCICH/1lkjKW5u/1aAt5Wlsfqqv7B 5mGA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEp5Nhizph8YMGuYoD0BzzyVQLMt7bC9vUQhm7SMpm07JMHbQno c3kEJRcv6GCVRLLNxo7ugcokaLxCdU5dCq+N1rRxUC5DqrM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpf9NUY7w3ZcbpjPmPwGOBWxyOcCEzsjRCRSB9RVqDKWi6YDpQsXvEfqGDE8Ul6qPE0g2KwsEUnviXVhwiVqcRQ= X-Received: by 2002:a63:c00b:: with SMTP id h11-v6mr11807225pgg.279.1532349011245; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:30:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Gabriel Kerneis Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:29:35 +0200 Message-ID: To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007d64b40571a9ce19" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 12:30:23 -0000 --0000000000007d64b40571a9ce19 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 2:44 PM Donald Eastlake wrote: > This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. I support adoption of this draft. > Comments on the draft also welcome. > Although the draft normatively references RFC6347, it uses the generic term "DTLS" throughout. I think it would be good if the document explicitly mentioned in the text that Babel DTLS uses DTLS 1.2 (or alternatively that a later version may also be used, but I have no clue how close draft-ietf-tls-dtls13 is to be published and deployed in the field). Gabriel --0000000000007d64b40571a9ce19 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Jul 19= , 2018 at 2:44 PM Donald Eastlake <d= 3e3e3@gmail.com> wrote:
This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel= -dtls.
Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit
longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you
think this draft should be adopted.

I suppo= rt adoption of this draft.
=C2=A0
Comments on the draft also=C2=A0
welcome.

Although the draft normatively= references RFC6347, it uses the generic term "DTLS" throughout. = I think it would be good if the document explicitly mentioned in the text t= hat Babel DTLS uses DTLS 1.2 (or alternatively that a later version may als= o be used, but I have no clue how close=C2=A0draft-ietf-tls-dtls13 is to be= published and deployed in the field).

Gabriel
--0000000000007d64b40571a9ce19-- From nobody Mon Jul 23 05:41:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9185130DE1 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:41:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 SRvns8hmUu9B for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x22a.google.com (mail-it0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40C0F130DED for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id 72-v6so1226359itw.3 for ; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:41:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=2hoOo+7oQsNDPcCeFX/p64/HCj8wLSn5BOCC+Wp+KGo=; b=fDSxEhKN/VucQm90t0KXKhuzMqzIJyNJFcR1KQPJuh5v7SSupeRF+mzbCBFXUFUhvr yeJaL20tn0T4PmjwcVsRt7EP2/tguwONmR1zfbYoAFCKcgGHgsZY77A65YkJzIRaPFjk bFJAeUFZxLWoHKKtEy9LyRQVhnygjZXrK8jkWeCrI1D6rsDXh0/a2I6S061OMJD1BCeY zo2P1DlIGZrzQpHpKzixJDEcYmCViE4sI1w9QOxQ0PC1WXIor6jH+LDZPz+/XbxlWz04 TIoaiK4O1FWAKK8gxXChltATVN2ryU4flv0dg3ukQxKHMqM/9B3wltb6BgvH08XIAENl 9yuA== 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=2hoOo+7oQsNDPcCeFX/p64/HCj8wLSn5BOCC+Wp+KGo=; b=tFyC5eldK9SEW4Upd7QragxNXQPlbETI9jDibn1h/r5uuqX8yQDXnhzFTPsSrpi0Dn JTi2O1fVvuxDC68VY4xQZvVB/F8M4hYri/DZu+39b3s+Dh89F/3picdm2iNXH2CW8PG7 mTgrJvsj/NDrngXZHBsIpXLNicudVvm5ZCfEwrJMGmm9NT9hMpBtW6ObXP1fYO4W5rqN tZtZT3rzP29eT7Z96/C+TOyIdw+9RDNy1crBAIkTov5WAudwK8WE5JAl04zs6MIhq1qO HGxJEMJ+gMKbnk1Vbd0bln9cBojjvPSOdnnvgFHPJVYEki6dPHpmnSf7u1esxkoNhdjF i+wQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEHZufQUhtdVL33FA/xVLjw3ILkWg0aFT7a51Dkm+zqJIYULWJT dZ0oMjeYJD0mOFQwVoLFYg5vImUckpXkgQhCnmemRQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpd6Sv81SQJQItmQB5N6qt8H4vfAW3txRIC7XZGg8XylgMATeEUS23AVX3hpxCKzRkhXm9xqzEGyhhIihlabOfM= X-Received: by 2002:a02:4c9b:: with SMTP id q27-v6mr10830976jad.38.1532349660536; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:41:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a4f:b442:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 05:40:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> <163cabe6d49.1115744068931.3357457871401802835@ovsienko.info> <87d0x6u1yd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <164c1f6c305.de4e0cfa319563.445636890330531708@ovsienko.info> <878t632m5q.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Ted Lemon Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:40:20 -0400 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek , babel-chairs@ietf.org, Denis Ovsienko , Babel at IETF Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003038f60571a9f5cc" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 12:41:04 -0000 --0000000000003038f60571a9f5cc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable HNCP isn't working for you to distribute IPv6 prefixes? On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > In my deployed babel network... I am dreading the source specific > change. But I've been prepared to have that flag day for three years, > and the ietf processes make me crazy. I have no less than 6 deployed > versions of babel in the field (and I mean, in the field, in trees, > and on rooftops), spread across 40+ routers, it will take me months or > years to replace them all... and the deployment strategy juliusz has > outlined is acceptable. > > In part due to the lack of a good ipv6 address distribution mechanism > (slight dig), very little of my network is ipv6 enabled, and the sad > way I assign source specific addresses now (ip route show | grep > "from" | pickaddresseslikeslaacdid), ipv6 source specific connectivity > either comes back on the reflash/reboot or it doesn't - and ipv4 keeps > working. The ipv6 stuff has largely not escaped the lab due to the > delays in standardization. > > due to the address assignment problem, I think very few babel > installations are using ipv6 all that much, except in non source > specific ways. > > Let's just get it over with and get the documents AND code out there > already. openwrt 18.06-rc2 is out now and it would be great to start > testing al the new stuff before it goes final. Warn people in the > README. > > If this were OSPF or BGP or ISIS I'd care more, but babel's deployment > is at least 3 orders of magnitude smaller than those. > > ship it. Move on. > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:52 AM Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > > > > > Thank you for reading. > > > > Our pleasure, as always. > > > > Denis, I've read your mail twice, and I do not understanding what you a= re > > proposing. Could you please succintly and clearly explain what it is > that > > you recommend that the working group should do? > > > > -- Juliusz > > > > _______________________________________________ > > babel mailing list > > babel@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > > > > -- > > Dave T=C3=A4ht > CEO, TekLibre, LLC > http://www.teklibre.com > Tel: 1-669-226-2619 > > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --0000000000003038f60571a9f5cc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
HNCP isn't working for you to distribute IPv6 prefixes= ?

On Sun, Ju= l 22, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wr= ote:
In my deployed babel network... I am= dreading the source specific
change. But I've been prepared to have that flag day for three years, and the ietf processes make me crazy. I have no less than 6 deployed
versions of babel in the field (and I mean, in the field, in trees,
and on rooftops), spread across 40+ routers, it will take me months or
years to replace them all... and the deployment strategy juliusz has
outlined is acceptable.

In part due to the lack of a good ipv6 address distribution mechanism
(slight dig), very little of my network is ipv6 enabled, and the sad
way I assign source specific addresses now (ip route show |=C2=A0 grep
"from" | pickaddresseslikeslaacdid), ipv6 source specific connect= ivity
either comes back on the reflash/reboot or it doesn't - and ipv4 keeps<= br> working. The ipv6 stuff has largely not escaped the lab due to the
delays in standardization.

due to the address assignment problem, I think very few babel
installations are using ipv6 all that much, except in non source
specific ways.

Let's just get it over with and get the documents AND code out there already. openwrt 18.06-rc2 is out now and it would be great to start
testing al the new stuff before it goes final. Warn people in the
README.

If this were OSPF or BGP or ISIS I'd care more, but babel's deploym= ent
is at least 3 orders of magnitude smaller than those.

ship it. Move on.
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:52 AM Ju= liusz Chroboczek <jch@irif.fr> wro= te:
>
> > Thank you for reading.
>
> Our pleasure, as always.
>
> Denis, I've read your mail twice, and I do not understanding what = you are
> proposing.=C2=A0 Could you please succintly and clearly explain what i= t is that
> you recommend that the working group should do?
>
> -- Juliusz
>
> _______________________________________________
> babel mailing list
> babel@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel=



--

Dave T=C3=A4ht
CEO, TekLibre, LLC
ht= tp://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-669-226-2619

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

--0000000000003038f60571a9f5cc-- From nobody Mon Jul 23 07:00:24 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0F91130DC1; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 07:00:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 qaq8rZ8wOzUN; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 07:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt0-x231.google.com (mail-qt0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42FBB128BAC; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 07:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x231.google.com with SMTP id h4-v6so676646qtj.7; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 07:00:19 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=h+NiRU3F+aUan+04DYnlVG7Hf/0ijK+YPgwER/NhlTQ=; b=tb8TPNTfskYpHtDwSkVO3NAh6eMb3Z9HXsIRiJvveD1dDM3dQ3q7s9Zbtz/2PVtz4q W1Bz9JV+2qtKI+7dfA9gxTDwdu0MPakvp9egHnp+jHGiJzr9Ft+hhu+Ix75qnOBAgGmv rwhnhOkwGKkz0/n0kZVzlv2pdZhKk960+YTmR4tDq1F11966OdQ18rdqptnHUw7TNSpv W7qCwwwI9Zfecm7DOLq+VkiKNelG85ebQwGaVHhMwFcmHjdsgLOEvwfCKM5sLilossB0 XlqiqE3SzFiobFC85Ps6wEbvKuXxEIRA0OYbJNWjMiNO4WRtcYaFr+s5qHqIoAEIy7AE Twww== 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=h+NiRU3F+aUan+04DYnlVG7Hf/0ijK+YPgwER/NhlTQ=; b=n67E8Jo6D9CmXStRg73gPyAuSstqVtDPuJSOvfvL9OFflft1jjISgWrADQPAsTTIg+ TMbvHZ3etTdybh7UVlfUID/ENkPqBL9SZbLMwpZBxI+0Hly+KLc4SH1gqJr4fh12KZuR f5OCHh4xjdig19xEO1Dl5d2MI1g7ieWAegzNqRGj6cuWdtkQOhXH6UMNNI3uHBVT30xf 5VKezGKg3zoBbAskyi0j3FB+qRDpkDmEN8w0Ei6I+9HwkoQaJwqobHJS07WKoTHoeV8l edZjD5Mzb0D4++9tttLAenCfj1ypt7S1dej/i5F8mPb/HDSfZsRHZIsKIWKbBVtmO5d9 5lkg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGnUSrhbS0jm6GdsejlDGT0ykcLLQ+s4anYTqX0P3go6nEtD25F ysxLQofEa4VR235ijX02zRb3uhetSye24q7Sy88= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcr5fNENUG1TFXmQkGsuKW124v10EkFyJELzcbyn/xiv8whloYP+nE4ZxG1h4tG4XOvMzkw7/IH6BL+VisvHLA= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:31cd:: with SMTP id i13-v6mr12171279qte.144.1532354417012; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 07:00:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <163a3eefcb3.105e54392539813.8869059599002671510@ovsienko.info> <0B1F8607-E0D3-4725-A9F2-2ACF41207D57@irif.fr> <163cabe6d49.1115744068931.3357457871401802835@ovsienko.info> <87d0x6u1yd.wl-jch@irif.fr> <164c1f6c305.de4e0cfa319563.445636890330531708@ovsienko.info> <878t632m5q.wl-jch@irif.fr> In-Reply-To: From: Dave Taht Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 07:01:06 -0700 Message-ID: To: Ted Lemon Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek , babel-chairs@ietf.org, Denis Ovsienko , Babel at IETF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-babel-source-specific (2018-03-26 to 2018-04-09) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:00:23 -0000 On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 5:41 AM Ted Lemon wrote: > > HNCP isn't working for you to distribute IPv6 prefixes? Can't deploy it without upgrading routers. No incentive to upgrade routers until source specific is solid again. The HNCP codebase is rotting and was never quite adaquate enough to replace odhcp(6) and dnsmasq in the first place. Also I have 80 or so subnets and all I generally get from each comcast modem is a /60 (last I checked, some get /56s), and hncp wants to give a publicly routable ipv6 address/subnet to everything. Given my networks are primarily ipv4 and I don't buy into the dream of an ipv6 only network, I have a mild preference towards distributing prefixes via something secure I can deploy along the edge that runs over the established ipv4 transport, also. IPv4 nat works well with multiple (potential) exit points with babel and without source specific ipv6 distributed, ipv6 is used just on the first internal hops (and if that hop breaks, happy eyeballs helps). But that's neither here nor there, aside from re-enforcing my point that source specific be made deployable again. If it wasn't for the wifi multicast problem, I'd have flattened this network into five big bridged domains long ago. I was so optimistic 5 years ago... > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:26 PM, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> In my deployed babel network... I am dreading the source specific >> change. But I've been prepared to have that flag day for three years, >> and the ietf processes make me crazy. I have no less than 6 deployed >> versions of babel in the field (and I mean, in the field, in trees, >> and on rooftops), spread across 40+ routers, it will take me months or >> years to replace them all... and the deployment strategy juliusz has >> outlined is acceptable. >> >> In part due to the lack of a good ipv6 address distribution mechanism >> (slight dig), very little of my network is ipv6 enabled, and the sad >> way I assign source specific addresses now (ip route show | grep >> "from" | pickaddresseslikeslaacdid), ipv6 source specific connectivity >> either comes back on the reflash/reboot or it doesn't - and ipv4 keeps >> working. The ipv6 stuff has largely not escaped the lab due to the >> delays in standardization. >> >> due to the address assignment problem, I think very few babel >> installations are using ipv6 all that much, except in non source >> specific ways. >> >> Let's just get it over with and get the documents AND code out there >> already. openwrt 18.06-rc2 is out now and it would be great to start >> testing al the new stuff before it goes final. Warn people in the >> README. >> >> If this were OSPF or BGP or ISIS I'd care more, but babel's deployment >> is at least 3 orders of magnitude smaller than those. >> >> ship it. Move on. >> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:52 AM Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> > >> > > Thank you for reading. >> > >> > Our pleasure, as always. >> > >> > Denis, I've read your mail twice, and I do not understanding what you = are >> > proposing. Could you please succintly and clearly explain what it is = that >> > you recommend that the working group should do? >> > >> > -- Juliusz >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > babel mailing list >> > babel@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Dave T=C3=A4ht >> CEO, TekLibre, LLC >> http://www.teklibre.com >> Tel: 1-669-226-2619 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> babel mailing list >> babel@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > > --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619 From nobody Mon Jul 23 08:26:24 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29C4A130EE7; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:26:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.021 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.021 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_EXCESS_BASE64=0.979, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 a8rzH_-hH9I5; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wr1-x432.google.com (mail-wr1-x432.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::432]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36155130EE0; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x432.google.com with SMTP id e7-v6so1121147wrs.9; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:26:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=U5MumZd4KGIepV3nXtEs34R7+2P1IN1ypw0mttSQ0IM=; b=B7N8jMaMFGRUXm+EtrtyXnwwB7AHgbCx6ElmJdLMngFM5tbezPHSn5NVPdlM0lOupE 7be48Ysqt5vmffIxXwqPec1MDV8epyHaihvJbp8brpTDZJ2qyyUwyhnFursBns4mHlG+ CvrLTlcsCv4fLDIIKCB3FwAbhvPO2YEOoQePWDXIUEg7iPhOCZMY8aHiY1omlxB7nN9q qEmZV1f3H4BMecLB0tgsznl6dOuwiDYgCur59zOoxnnPJqtOSkT36e5wx7L+NHwQTFFH Yr2/4XfjU7321dh0HBpJ5vv1DwIBqCyyLcvDdcLDy63NcBD6HpslvNk+yywTpYQd88Lh cILg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=U5MumZd4KGIepV3nXtEs34R7+2P1IN1ypw0mttSQ0IM=; b=NTDMt47k741TXFV7t3uYgq8Th4oYrIK6WLxbEfN7avo0Iv5qpzWB1NxMOdzuTWoLRR +XBaBktKk+2cHx1lmBHGnezhX9Pa9priXJeNcsn7WjmPcPArZm7RaKPh227tI0pz+HLw mRe8xTEkLD8TwL2rV3SO+o8ncq02uu9hqMiXHpagOLIEe7LQP5qZi48/S5+nlNzT/NGK ChHJpFikv0Q3S8xluPAME410DpMEwasNhmXkEYXeMZ1mzJh5SzGNyaX7d8VQPFiNWcj3 PhrAJS7NErAUmdkk9HDcn/VTJ+AszfbUFaqNlksMzhauuDOdmCs6LnHbpdoqnfdTByDk jBIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGnmr6op8VHZNTFAgx1LrFEtsJWi7Cf76j0Qo9GupVKrOS+RJCS GAV5EaZIC4pkubIcEYmjGZE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeRvx9fQG/Q0z0sA3m0fl7XxvV6m0dBI2t623jpg3vJo2hSl8xk7Q/Z5Wu6UrCYGHDaVCSGEg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:45c1:: with SMTP id b1-v6mr9052863wrs.106.1532359579724; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:26:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Jabberwock.gmail.com (176-190-174-144.abo.bbox.fr. [176.190.174.144]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 67-v6sm16073908wmw.6.2018.07.23.08.26.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:26:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 17:25:04 +0200 Message-ID: <87tvoqq8j3.wl-antonin.decimo@gmail.com> From: Antonin =?UTF-8?B?RMOpY2ltbw==?= To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 Emacs/26 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 15:26:23 -0000 On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:46:37 +0200, Donald Eastlake wrote: >=20 > This message begins a WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. I support the adoption. -- Antonin Décimo From nobody Mon Jul 23 13:36:48 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27189130F35; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:36:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.852 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=1.049, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 vVS7s-mQuVcN; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4C30130E25; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6NKZqBV017748; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:35:52 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD9AAEB22E; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id bo19ynd-XWQM; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.42.107] (AAubervilliers-652-1-185-129.w86-218.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.218.72.129]) (Authenticated sender: boutier@irif.fr) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8AFC9EB27A; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:33:27 +0200 Message-ID: From: Matthieu Boutier To: Babel , Donald Cc: babel-chairs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:35:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B563C28.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B563C28.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B563C28.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 20:36:46 -0000 U3VwcG9ydC4KClR5cG86IGNsaWVudCBvZiAob3IpIHNlcnZlciByb2xlCgpNYXR0aGlldQ== From nobody Mon Jul 23 13:36:53 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42320130E25; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:36:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.852 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=1.049, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 zpDWZywylPF8; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 069CA130F30; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6NKZqZE017755 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:35:52 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/75695) with ESMTP id w6NKa8i2012910; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:08 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D77AEB279; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id Q5vNF482iax5; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.42.107] (AAubervilliers-652-1-185-129.w86-218.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.218.72.129]) (Authenticated sender: boutier@irif.fr) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C6943EB8C4; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 08:33:27 +0200 Message-ID: From: Matthieu Boutier To: Babel , Donald Cc: babel-chairs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:35:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:36:08 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B563C28.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 5B563C38.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B563C28.002 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B563C38.003 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B563C28.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B563C38.003 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 20:36:46 -0000 U3VwcG9ydC4KClR5cG86IGNsaWVudCBvZiAob3IpIHNlcnZlciByb2xlCgpNYXR0aGlldQ== From nobody Mon Jul 23 13:58:10 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EC37130F3A; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:58:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 40d3KSTjs6Yv; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:58:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6747130E2D; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 13:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6NKvD0Y021659; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:57:13 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF3FEB22E; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:58:04 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id PGGqmEinHydX; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:58:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.42.107] (AAubervilliers-652-1-185-129.w86-218.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.218.72.129]) (Authenticated sender: boutier@irif.fr) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 65AD7EB22D; Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:58:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:58:01 +0200 Message-ID: <8dmxnmqra0xtx2q0xjn3cwhd.1532327628472@email.android.com> From: Matthieu Boutier To: Babel , Donald Cc: babel-chairs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--_com.android.email_420283469780080" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Mon, 23 Jul 2018 22:57:13 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B564129.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B564129.001 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B564129.001 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 20:58:09 -0000 ----_com.android.email_420283469780080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 U3VwcG9ydC4KClR5cG86IGEgcGFpciAocGVlcikgQgoKCk1hdHRoaWV1 ----_com.android.email_420283469780080 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PHAgZGlyPSJsdHIiPlN1cHBvcnQuPC9wPgo8cCBkaXI9Imx0ciI+VHlwbzogYSBwYWlyIChwZWVy KSBCPGJyPjwvcD4KPHAgZGlyPSJsdHIiPk1hdHRoaWV1PC9wPgo= ----_com.android.email_420283469780080-- From nobody Tue Jul 24 09:09:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69166131162; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 09:09:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 qzdctrCm8lkc; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 09:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55A6C131156; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 09:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id f21-v6so3092827wmc.5; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 09:09:12 -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=+qSVkK/qxy/eFk0nLwOC+s4haXNoYaJqYQ1ItmIlIx0=; b=BaKXK3MtKBhdB/jOToD24UotoQHgS4VJMa7c49STr2jY/1OZziThJZZUOHe2lnDz6v N4AtTr/JwEoj2sQ/aE1xnLQa4Rpahx6Z3DnLcA/tTy54INZOdFqPrTsLU4x8gaJtc3uO 1ze905B3R9+k46aEDaMG+YHMVS29nkYunnEvEK2yxw4RzYD1yeOAKzfAYN/28li7kC2t LPo9iASFtZuYDDKhfzRXbNdvetCiBqrYRY5aT6xXTgeLoXpBgJq2hmmBWkhleT3OaSr3 wZmd1SNYpknGavsWpNAj5ZO+Ke4FuqjwmJDGNjjuTqzoQ0BOUJhAcoOcmLspxEBgVfpd aXUA== 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=+qSVkK/qxy/eFk0nLwOC+s4haXNoYaJqYQ1ItmIlIx0=; b=nbpS1Bb+Vnp/edeTjvGsYHFrmT/cIUsk/baUZlFT/H3vwa6rMYleG2ZL5CgybVuvuC szFWL8I3FdxB7URiqRGp27GR1dSsujLkQZr7ngzEzqxk+EpBFKg/Jy+8fdfgT465yb56 Mr14oWpyX5TcUmdG5iu4nbxlNrUcUbzoKvmLEKjPZGdWPqmODn6DOQZyP9io4ci1qBP1 wdbguJxkIk8tzpTZdw8qE4M4umyrXiLGhs1/6e57rklmIO0Vet53l/0h06y5VWtSQNjl WRhf7GRl4iLqKjCVfEWrIsJ4u9qjv/Q+wBGcoyGbmSFCJHMq0Ok+PNykqKMbZDPtZFcv 420w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlE027X2jLSBa/CgR/Nyp38E5TyvzpLmhAoTKrHe6Gogu2VU30H/ JpfdeaJ3SXGpOnOPnyAlsg41onFfaGohzxsOwSU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdMLoeEiBtk7C8rTcBlWEZSu3Q6BmkMLUK9FZu1BInJ6zLSbplwj/sM/nfKVCmKoTZcIWAMa7tasBt8seQ3Wso= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1509:: with SMTP id 9-v6mr2216048wmv.142.1532448550892; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 09:09:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:adf:a414:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 09:09:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Tim Wicinski Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 12:09:10 -0400 Message-ID: To: Matthieu Boutier Cc: Babel , Donald , babel-chairs Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000834c590571c0fb2b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 16:09:15 -0000 --000000000000834c590571c0fb2b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I'm not a big fan of DTLS, so I will Abstain from this. On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 2:33 AM, Matthieu Boutier wrote: > Support. > > Typo: client of (or) server role > > Matthieu > _______________________________________________ > babel mailing list > babel@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel > --000000000000834c590571c0fb2b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm not a big fan of DTLS, so I will Abstain = from this.=C2=A0

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 2:33 AM, Matthieu Boutier <boutier@irif.f= r> wrote:
Support.

Typo: client of (or) server role

Matthieu
_______________________________________________
babel mailing list
babel@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel

--000000000000834c590571c0fb2b-- From nobody Wed Jul 25 21:26:29 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA01130F47; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:26:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.75 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 O38HrCyZO30X; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:26:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-x235.google.com (mail-it0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C308130E7D; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:26:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-x235.google.com with SMTP id s7-v6so991407itb.4; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:26:25 -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=NYO9OCiC18i1R8JqHm573/5KFoe/jg0nJF5P3rA7ssA=; b=L0y5jutTtbFlPLfNcnBLBMcWFt8dDI21XRVoU8cNIBG6WHI7Dk5Tdl+FqhQvggflq7 4RFE5Xd3LmvSC56n2TaQcFiSZQC4e+CcIaPhyHHJ61uE3diuQBRemIYdnm9I1P/zuXcu 6J/NU26LW4Wzj4mzC+i7HZbfjzophElmFCoGS5dhEKGvQYcDvxpDA1/Tove57DWPwMLt qD7pn6MP98bn5dYlHgcdOCEnL0Ct3UFKLlmNPY6Vcr0XXTHy/M1QJga2Xyi7XOp3Ylez mKBjJcAYeAtufXtAeAGCa0ZJ5ZOeRXS2cgZ1NmqWjpELocWsD3XVIML8lRHAuuy7hUUC uKoQ== 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=NYO9OCiC18i1R8JqHm573/5KFoe/jg0nJF5P3rA7ssA=; b=f4jtSPuIv4cOR15pRi3te1B6pHsWyReReoJJwCmx/MY3NCIPVmO2qK0m/kX6s4uCz9 fNMGkAFvuglPbJAPRBnY4qpFpgEA4bIhJwioXxnCO9qRg0wDUXKdtRO3pfsjIiTvmkEb 7QmUDxI7ua6RYHTjDqeZmsRB9xAL3HiX14nBbf+JScUvGOSyKfdmnv7IX0RAqPGX4u+A 3ZES6e3S+RlDUeAflEgZUZ//JyWlDULADCdnmvmVldJgOzUhm534YzjohyRSjElLpqCQ b/DkVO4Tz39qB94rt3K4J7GebqVHjApRkljPnkbLFhy+uJqIQ3+oorwEk2+bghKblHo5 e3lQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHy67Ak5nq7ih/9v4Zn2qvI16yAPwnrK09w/V1XHnflLt0YFjX1 sPcXzGE3xTI6r1xDI7QDrFeZtcRDfpxdMaohuXr/KA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfjWkQNS8kBs6hfefrZEdAkKoc4M7JeDCprJFHwJX5jsp5KLaXVLyy4T144cvBF5q5fTIMhP+BTbgIdrhb/tfg= X-Received: by 2002:a24:7d0a:: with SMTP id b10-v6mr592698itc.105.1532579184683; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:26:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Jul 2018 21:26:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Donald Eastlake Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 00:26:09 -0400 Message-ID: To: Babel at IETF Cc: babel-chairs@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="000000000000e4d8390571df65c9" Archived-At: Subject: [babel] Suggested Babel Milestones Revision X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 04:26:27 -0000 --000000000000e4d8390571df65c9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, Attached are the suggested milestones, modified from those presented at the Babel WG meeting earlier this month as discussed at that meeting. Comments welcome. Thanks, Donald =============================== Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com --000000000000e4d8390571df65c9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; name="PossibleNewMilestons201807.txt" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="PossibleNewMilestons201807.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Attachment-Id: f_jk221wwp0 Q09NUExFVEVECkp1bCAyMDE2IC0gV0cgYWRvcHRpb24gb2YgQmFiZWwgQXBwbGljYWJpbGl0eSBk cmFmdCAKSnVsIDIwMTYgLSBXRyBhZG9wdGlvbiBvZiBSRkM2MTI2YmlzIGRyYWZ0Ck9jdCAyMDE2 IC0gV0cgYWRvcHRpb24gb2YgQmFiZWwgTWFuYWdlbWVuCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAoSW5mbyBNb2Rl bCAmIFlBTkcgTW9kZWwpIGRyYWZ0CgpGVVRVUkUKQXVnIDIwMTggLSBJRVNHIFN1Ym1pc3Npb24g b2YgQmFiZWwgQXBwbGljYWJpbGl0eSBkcmFmdAogICAgICAgICAgICAgKEluZm9ybWF0aW9uYWwp Ck9jdCAyMDE4IC0gSUVTRyBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIG9mIFJGQzYxMjZiaXMgYW5kCiAgICAgICAgICAg cG90ZW50aWFsIGNvbXBhbmlvbiBzZWN1cml0eSBtZWNoYW5pc20gZHJhZnRzCgkgICAgIChQcm9w b3NlZCBTdGFuZGFyZCkKT2N0IDIwMTggLSBJRVNHIFN1Ym1pc3Npb24gb2Ygc291cmNlIHNwZWNp ZmljIEJhYmVsIGRyYWZ0CiAgICAgICAgICAgICAoUHJvcG9zZWQgU3RhbmRhcmQpClNlcCAyMDE4 IC0gSUVTRyBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIG9mIEJhYmVsIEluZm9ybWF0aW9uIE1vZGVsIGRyYWZ0CiAgICAg ICAgICAgICAoUHJvcG9zZWQgU3RhbmRhcmQpCkp1biAyMDE4IC0gSUVTRyBTdWJtaXNzaW9uIG9m IEJhYmVsIE1hbmFnZW1lbnQgZHJhZnQKICAgICAgICAgICAgIChQcm9wb3NlZCBTdGFuZGFyZCkK --000000000000e4d8390571df65c9-- From nobody Thu Jul 26 05:33:31 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6740C13111C; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:33:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 0YaIBDEDLtZk; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:33:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47E34130F83; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:33:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0049295.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w6QCPJ0u010963; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:33:26 -0400 Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2kfe1s8fss-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:33:25 -0400 Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w6QCXNoY006981; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:33:24 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [135.47.91.93]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w6QCXKkJ006935; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:33:20 -0400 Received: from zlp30488.vci.att.com (zlp30488.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 3FA454048C2C; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 12:33:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAC.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.8.218.152]) by zlp30488.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id 2CE0E4048C30; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 12:33:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.81]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAC.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.152]) with mapi id 14.03.0408.000; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:33:19 -0400 From: "STARK, BARBARA H" To: "'Donald Eastlake'" , Babel at IETF CC: "babel-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [babel] Suggested Babel Milestones Revision Thread-Index: AQHUJJjWTDXtzf1JwEidbj6BqEvuiqShb0jg Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 12:33:19 +0000 Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE5346B@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.10.241.13] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-07-26_03:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1807260131 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Suggested Babel Milestones Revision X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 12:33:31 -0000 SSB0aGluayB0aGUgbGFzdCBpdGVtIGlzIHN1cHBvc2VkIHRvIGJlIDIwMTksIG5vdCAyMDE4PyBC VFcsIGl0IG5vdyBhcHBlYXJzIHdlIG1heSBhY3R1YWxseSBiZSBhYmxlIHRvIGdldCB0aGF0IG1v ZGVsIGRvbmUgZWFybGllciB0aGFuIHRoYXQuIA0KDQpNYXJrdXM6IEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgeW91 IG5lZWQgdG8gZG8gYW55dGhpbmcgcmFzaCB5ZXQsIGxpa2UgbGVhcm5pbmcgWUFORy4gSSdtIHdv cmtpbmcgd2l0aCBhbm90aGVyIHZvbHVudGVlciAoc2xpZ2h0IGFybS10d2lzdGluZyBpbnZvbHZl ZCkgd2hvIGhhcyBzaWduaWZpY2FudCBZQU5HIGV4cGVydGlzZS4g8J+Yig0KQmFyYmFyYQ0KDQo+ IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQo+IEhpLA0KPiANCj4gQXR0YWNoZWQgYXJlIHRo ZSBzdWdnZXN0ZWQgbWlsZXN0b25lcywgbW9kaWZpZWQgZnJvbSB0aG9zZSBwcmVzZW50ZWQgYXQN Cj4gdGhlIEJhYmVsIFdHIG1lZXRpbmcgZWFybGllciB0aGlzIG1vbnRoIGFzIGRpc2N1c3NlZCBh dCB0aGF0IG1lZXRpbmcuDQo+IENvbW1lbnRzIHdlbGNvbWUuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGFua3MsDQo+IERv bmFsZA0KPiA9PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQo+ICBEb25hbGQgRS4gRWFz dGxha2UgM3JkICAgKzEtNTA4LTMzMy0yMjcwIChjZWxsKQ0KPiAgMTQyNCBQcm8gU2hvcCBDb3Vy dCwgRGF2ZW5wb3J0LCBGTCAzMzg5NiBVU0EgIGQzZTNlM0BnbWFpbC5jb20NCg== From nobody Thu Jul 26 05:46:46 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992C3131124; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:46:44 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 gjNVNltdneVC; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:46:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A965131120; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:46:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6QCjnhg011441; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:45:49 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE6BEB22E; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:46:40 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id PxEtRCE3utKc; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:46:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 65DA5EB200; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:46:39 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:46:39 +0200 Message-ID: <87pnzacggg.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Donald Eastlake Cc: Babel at IETF , babel-chairs@ietf.org In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:45:49 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B59C27D.003 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B59C27D.003 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B59C27D.003 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Suggested Babel Milestones Revision X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 12:46:45 -0000 > Oct 2018 - IESG Submission of source specific Babel draft > (Proposed Standard) Which reminds me that we haven't yet shown interoperability of the new source-specific protocol. -- Juliusz From nobody Thu Jul 26 10:10:33 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361A313125B; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:10:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) 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 lKnpzUnLraQf; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x236.google.com (mail-io0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D4FB131221; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:10:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x236.google.com with SMTP id l7-v6so1958406ioj.1; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:10:03 -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=023TGhR+8JC97/G8u6+qBIUHVW9djeI4LCnWRhh18Ww=; b=knhe/XCW0MwgpXzpFGGVjVZDDefBJFHqaBWb7Xzaqw1m1n9b3tIVp3AmllE2eMuC/w dtwQeZ06uXQyI0/4ZngM5Zq7mBYbXkn2LHdJAzdES6kYDOuN05SPz/RtNd9Km7l9P/h7 RcvSynZi9IcKRN+dyqNpu6Zv88LTJtpYLxQWWufCxeSq/9VGAjcDdLv3B6MdSJlQn5ih 0RtWOvAagJ2bhlZeANkgCiNIJ2kyHOya+mfXq82FnoYhCXv2Z9MN9XWeUxuz8QQt2Lyf L8uUnpVWsxznN2MA4cJh8FCtHXkP+sNDwFCeFard29fRWl0Y0a8I/9p06QBGnrRGUvT8 Ty8Q== 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=023TGhR+8JC97/G8u6+qBIUHVW9djeI4LCnWRhh18Ww=; b=IUFuofr5eGBU4BKvhhR+C31mm8ohiY24MX7V9wUSuP2Ajuw/N3Mf1WWv/ryWK9c2sp eHm3kjBzT8w430EmKMfbEfo6UyKDL5Zj73r8HDBodRGKmOrwc564A15rko5uRxPZ/Q+8 j5LJeNrbM1xk5YJSHQvLQVNkDX5/0PcyP2zRqtzHdV94J5DXOXVmXaZaMYcSIAx0+1Kl 3eB/0Am2sAk3FJl353yr9frfW/HDUJzi2ys1zBbM0bSvFYJI1AcmsuZiVmEa4uhG2I+O ZI+DGJn5C+Q44wrtiwKU+bfduSttU6qMtjV9ixssCBNoLPrlm9dORdTam6bnDmzgXqA4 SzOA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEia3S3NaJRTeYg1fQKHQOXZLCTRD2KN0zpczQfa/qNtMV4tAZN pwaPAM7kN1IxwMegS6/me9laRxuRePYS3qi/PMY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeWDmfSJnwtapkKDwo2k1WiSzlKekHne07zya2OxETETflHlX6IfnOdK70ZkbRnwJhLJQ71dI9wkNDqxkJ8mzg= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:343:: with SMTP id 64-v6mr2457859iod.66.1532625002749; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:10:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:4d0:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:09:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE5346B@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DE5346B@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> From: Donald Eastlake Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 13:09:47 -0400 Message-ID: To: "STARK, BARBARA H" Cc: Babel at IETF , "babel-chairs@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] Suggested Babel Milestones Revision X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 17:10:11 -0000 Hi Barbara, Yes, the last item is supposed to be 2019. Sorry for the error. Thanks, Donald =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 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 8:33 AM, STARK, BARBARA H wrote: > I think the last item is supposed to be 2019, not 2018? BTW, it now appea= rs we may actually be able to get that model done earlier than that. > > Markus: I don't think you need to do anything rash yet, like learning YAN= G. I'm working with another volunteer (slight arm-twisting involved) who ha= s significant YANG expertise. =F0=9F=98=8A > Barbara > >> -----Original Message----- >> Hi, >> >> Attached are the suggested milestones, modified from those presented at >> the Babel WG meeting earlier this month as discussed at that meeting. >> Comments welcome. >> >> Thanks, >> Donald >> =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 >> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) >> 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport, FL 33896 USA d3e3e3@gmail.com From nobody Sat Jul 28 15:19:09 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFFDD130EC7 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:19:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kapsi.fi 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 ARHQ1sVMA1H4 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:19:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.kapsi.fi (mail.kapsi.fi [IPv6:2001:67c:1be8::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30F0C130E61 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:19:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kapsi.fi; s=20161220; h=To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date: In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=aTF7vTtMBFNIVCHAFPAUa8/bVa9lHFM1QY7/XT+uKE8=; b=WJIZBQMry1b/uqAMWSwlJ/nzvI PODu209XpmSwBtwKrKuh9Zc9dAWRE7KVvDWDReEwi8p//PwsqIOEu14a8usS+sxo+IQ69xjLQVkza iMpwQ8DXdw0U8PvHw40WGSRjSP/9MiN4g7bwK/xgzCwz6ZkPcYNlM9NPnzCpSvNA8LYhIlt+rom2x 5d3MexjH3mqK1fYf8Pm+2j5PiV9hByPosCDgfEBIgw6NJKg1aB5kfGuB7ZmVJI4b2wVMr/oQs9Vmn Da5jfbGwnwLCgzFbcR3uiEdIM0/TvBq966rjCIdtMQgzqKDvRF2C8PWMiYfrPV81ntaO0zvtu97Gv Hn63DatA==; Received: from 91-155-69-202.elisa-laajakaista.fi ([91.155.69.202] helo=poro.lan) by mail.kapsi.fi with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fjXYC-0007sf-LL; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 01:19:00 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Markus Stenberg In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 01:18:58 +0300 Cc: Babel at IETF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Donald Eastlake X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 91.155.69.202 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: markus.stenberg@iki.fi X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.kapsi.fi); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 22:19:08 -0000 On 19 Jul 2018, at 15.43, Donald Eastlake wrote: > This message begin a WG adoption call for draft-decimo-babel-dtls. > Since this starts during an IETF meeting, it is running for a bit > longer than usual, through August 6th. Please indicate whether you > think this draft should be adopted. Comments on the draft also > welcome. Support. I am _slightly_ leery of the client <> server selection = semantics ( it assumes both nodes will wind up wanting to contact each = other around same time, and that may not be the case for some situations = perhaps and in that case if you note that =E2=80=98the other guy is = client=E2=80=99 and he never connects you, you cannot get secure TLVs = across ). I would also prefer distinct port. And a pony.=20 That said, I am happy enough with the current text as well ;-) -Markus= From nobody Sat Jul 28 15:35:24 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54FD9131152 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:35:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kapsi.fi 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 iE1x6DuyhY5v for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:35:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.kapsi.fi (mail.kapsi.fi [IPv6:2001:67c:1be8::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8075130DD8 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:35:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kapsi.fi; s=20161220; h=To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date: In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=KVEOCpBrYyx+gLNen1fCuihQeLxRvUq42lPcx07s084=; b=zn+OldQawdOXO5vVqtgD1kO0R5 NSnpNPyZD2NjibWUeMA+rPoFu+G73+mtDdWNtY1YntOZM5j4s0Othe1fCOIbX/VyiquLPyqS68p9L k8FJSgqhff2zsRamrBgt2rBOmdodoxOg9alxhNVgUk+bZxzXKAe0Z9lrgvVK0N1U7+TmhZJH7FB4I hYyd8LclGCy89L1Zu2i195nOVHryDmvqTqSgyqvM7DA1p8kL8kRv/eTqENUdfpQUSMgMZs1Ar7k6N DzRKirL14wHM8mH66/14FNf/nUgJuMO+xaatmwRvKCv3ObGCaUL564x+ywivNg81qRtUCH/Qv4+9E VG0KCMPA==; Received: from 91-155-69-202.elisa-laajakaista.fi ([91.155.69.202] helo=poro.lan) by mail.kapsi.fi with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fjXnz-0003Dq-4X; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 01:35:19 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Markus Stenberg In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 01:35:18 +0300 Cc: Babel at IETF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Donald Eastlake X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 91.155.69.202 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: markus.stenberg@iki.fi X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.kapsi.fi); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 22:35:23 -0000 I have read the draft and support adoption. That said..nit or two :-) Whenever B resets its PC, or whenever B doesn't know whether its PC has been reset, it picks an index that it has never used before (either by drawing it randomly or by using a reliable hardware clock) and starts sending PCs with that index. I think there are 3 potential sources for index: - nvram/flash (truly unique, frequently but not always available) - magic timestamp (e.g. GPS, magical secure NTP might give us ~unique = timestamp, or RTC that never goes backward for this purpose.. but = typical routers do not have strictly monotonic hardware clocks the text = notes) - something pseudorandom that has sufficiently low collision likelihood = given the number of bits of index so I think the text (and some of the following) is slightly optimistic. = I would probably just settle for a sufficiently low collision chance. Also, I would like to have byte(/few bits) somewhere indicating the = algorithm used for HMAC. Maybe I=E2=80=99m just tired and can=E2=80=99t = see one that is already there. Cheers, -Markus From nobody Sat Jul 28 15:53:59 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D50A213115B for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:53:57 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 EncftpckwI2F for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:53:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DBAF130E22 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 15:53:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6SMqx3H025581; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 00:52:59 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F1A2EB22E; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 00:53:50 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id XtPP4VMZmVxC; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 00:53:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A35E7EB22D; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 00:53:47 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 00:53:47 +0200 Message-ID: <87muubhszo.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Markus Stenberg Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 29 Jul 2018 00:53:02 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B5CF3CB.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B5CF3CB.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B5CF3CB.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 22:53:58 -0000 > I have read the draft and support adoption. > That said..nit or two :-) We're listening. > Whenever B resets its PC, or whenever B doesn't know whether > its PC has been reset, it picks an index that it has never used > before (either by drawing it randomly or by using a reliable hardware > clock) and starts sending PCs with that index. > I think there are 3 potential sources for index: > - nvram/flash (truly unique, frequently but not always available) > - magic timestamp (e.g. GPS, magical secure NTP might give us ~unique timestamp, or RTC that never goes backward for this purpose.. but typical routers do not have strictly monotonic hardware clocks the text notes) > - something pseudorandom that has sufficiently low collision likelihood given the number of bits of index > so I think the text (and some of the following) is slightly > optimistic. I would probably just settle for a sufficiently low > collision chance. So I just need to add "likely", as in "likely not used before"? Or are you suggesting something more? > Also, I would like to have byte(/few bits) somewhere indicating the > algorithm used for HMAC. Maybe I’m just tired and can’t see one that is > already there. There's none. The procedure is: - receiver computes HMAC for each algo/key pair it has been provisioned with; - it does a bytewise comparison of the result of each key computation with each HMAC computed in the packet. So the receiver doesn't need to know the algorithm used by the sender -- it only needs to know which algorithm is associated to each of the keys it has been provisioned with. Am I missing something? What purpose would adding info about the algorithm to the on-the-wire HMAC serve? -- Juliusz From nobody Sat Jul 28 23:08:28 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0277130E6F for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:08:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kapsi.fi 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 pPpoPbWJXUVK for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:08:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.kapsi.fi (mail.kapsi.fi [IPv6:2001:67c:1be8::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EC32130E27 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:08:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kapsi.fi; s=20161220; h=To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date: In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=bH6H35fzEa3olyrEIMGoQ4MF0JOij3mElZYfWzVYlOE=; b=wdkWvOhpX4pCOU+MkKBXWpfQL/ CiwTCAS50fKZF/yA4pwMjKwYBWhIIODFRx/wRpHTFhQTMzLncoH4zHAddIZtkZtvt+yVIXzzAEZ8t ZgD0Lv9SmCbOWdTwljm5cDiapsq3m0jlsCYfCQB/RwjJ39ziO4YRFEf8WKW2nMC+/AmBXZR/4mYN2 bJXtzsFrZs6BzYfLF/rrZXldrDMbtuG5Arcu8isHKtveQvfDJXQZGlmSmA47hsmLm2QnCL+xaKv6j HwtWjU0kKsoEF7lUDJLUdFVrvz0b25PHfDHhjTtLEbTKovfddhsJRWhpgVaUNvPx+vfKDqOiDxjDs fC7qqroQ==; Received: from 91-155-69-202.elisa-laajakaista.fi ([91.155.69.202] helo=poro.lan) by mail.kapsi.fi with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fjesM-0005qE-Mk; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 09:08:18 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Markus Stenberg In-Reply-To: <87muubhszo.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 09:08:17 +0300 Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7432C9DE-664D-4264-B862-0BD4459DA82B@iki.fi> References: <87muubhszo.wl-jch@irif.fr> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 91.155.69.202 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: markus.stenberg@iki.fi X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.kapsi.fi); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 06:08:27 -0000 On 29 Jul 2018, at 1.53, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > Whenever B resets its PC, or whenever B doesn't know whether >> its PC has been reset, it picks an index that it has never used >> before (either by drawing it randomly or by using a reliable = hardware >> clock) and starts sending PCs with that index. >=20 >> I think there are 3 potential sources for index: >=20 >> - nvram/flash (truly unique, frequently but not always available) >> - magic timestamp (e.g. GPS, magical secure NTP might give us ~unique = timestamp, or RTC that never goes backward for this purpose.. but = typical routers do not have strictly monotonic hardware clocks the text = notes) >> - something pseudorandom that has sufficiently low collision = likelihood given the number of bits of index >=20 >> so I think the text (and some of the following) is slightly >> optimistic. I would probably just settle for a sufficiently low >> collision chance. > So I just need to add "likely", as in "likely not used before"? Or = are > you suggesting something more? Nah, just wording changes here and there (there are few places that = assume the options 1/2 which are not realistic always). >> Also, I would like to have byte(/few bits) somewhere indicating the >> algorithm used for HMAC. Maybe I=E2=80=99m just tired and can=E2=80=99t= see one that is >> already there. >=20 > There's none. The procedure is: >=20 > - receiver computes HMAC for each algo/key pair it has been = provisioned with; > - it does a bytewise comparison of the result of each key computation > with each HMAC computed in the packet. >=20 > So the receiver doesn't need to know the algorithm used by the sender = -- > it only needs to know which algorithm is associated to each of the = keys it > has been provisioned with. >=20 > Am I missing something? What purpose would adding info about the > algorithm to the on-the-wire HMAC serve? Ah, nevermind, I was still in the mindset with the key id actually on = the wire (that=E2=80=99s what I get for rereading drafts at night). = Without it, as I reread section 4.3, algorithm does not have to be = either. So it is fine as it stands. That said, this design leads to N times more efficient CPU DOS = (non-accelerated SHA256 on slow CPU times MTU worth of HMACs =3D quite a = lot of computation on low-end devices). Then again, I am not sure it = really matters (and implementation can constrain that as they want to = anyway). Cheers, -Markus= From nobody Sat Jul 28 23:10:07 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80D82130E6F for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:10:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kapsi.fi 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 NRDpNFjBySAe for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:10:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.kapsi.fi (mail.kapsi.fi [IPv6:2001:67c:1be8::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72C97130E27 for ; Sat, 28 Jul 2018 23:10:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kapsi.fi; s=20161220; h=To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date: In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=+O+pM7h0muhRTQUNr+OkRP4+MlipTjdmNyDR4H+EZ4M=; b=D0nF6vdS8ASZ2+Yks4CSpl4gUV ZerkFDaP7AaP7sNSf2uAcoVCccfdYqXZ1MfmgyMX4Vk5O/VWsHc6/38nFEKjxAL9jb8KXiFXhLbxs QBIcxmgtnCCWfaICLpA6UX81qBc/7g1AQM0VIdsa/k74JVTr6lam4NHCXdPO5ZEsxluqSNcNgyJis f+OnsP4OBosdaKTj8cs+Fc4anr1qrj7tuQcO2YgjTclAX9fK9GcoHl8Tm1CvJTCvEKKbkUie+qN0b xSxgwD9z7P/gskzHJD3JkaM8XnXqT2Sn0X32nvnX0W/NdkTH/Lq3+lultrDYEYglT0n87dJlpl/l7 BiWkWiSw==; Received: from 91-155-69-202.elisa-laajakaista.fi ([91.155.69.202] helo=poro.lan) by mail.kapsi.fi with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fjeu1-0006H9-4S; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 09:10:01 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Markus Stenberg In-Reply-To: <7432C9DE-664D-4264-B862-0BD4459DA82B@iki.fi> Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 09:10:00 +0300 Cc: Donald Eastlake , Babel at IETF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <61BD929A-C731-422C-875A-BDF31139A385@iki.fi> References: <87muubhszo.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7432C9DE-664D-4264-B862-0BD4459DA82B@iki.fi> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 91.155.69.202 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: markus.stenberg@iki.fi X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.kapsi.fi); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 06:10:06 -0000 On 29 Jul 2018, at 9.08, Markus Stenberg wrote: > That said, this design leads to N times more efficient CPU DOS = (non-accelerated SHA256 on slow CPU times MTU worth of HMACs =3D quite a = lot of computation on low-end devices). Then again, I am not sure it = really matters (and implementation can constrain that as they want to = anyway). Not even that actually, as long as you keep reasonably low number of = keys on a device (ideally only one); it will calculate hmacs only for # = of keys _it has_, not # of HMAC TLVs in packet. I think I left my brain on vacation :-) Cheers, -Markus= From nobody Sun Jul 29 03:41:05 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4C612F295 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 03:41:03 -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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 ZoB58PtVB-MI for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 03:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E346127148 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 03:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/75695) with ESMTP id w6TAe8Z4015146; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:40:08 +0200 Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F80EB22D; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:40:59 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id ENPxxeGkC7ty; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:40:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pirx.irif.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D67C8EB200; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:40:56 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:40:56 +0200 Message-ID: <87lg9ufhon.wl-jch@irif.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: Markus Stenberg Cc: Babel at IETF In-Reply-To: <61BD929A-C731-422C-875A-BDF31139A385@iki.fi> References: <87muubhszo.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7432C9DE-664D-4264-B862-0BD4459DA82B@iki.fi> <61BD929A-C731-422C-875A-BDF31139A385@iki.fi> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Sun, 29 Jul 2018 12:40:09 +0200 (CEST) X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 5B5D9988.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)! X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5B5D9988.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/ X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5B5D9988.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000 X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 10:41:04 -0000 >> That said, this design leads to N times more efficient CPU DOS >> (non-accelerated SHA256 on slow CPU times MTU worth of HMACs = quite >> a lot of computation on low-end devices). Then again, I am not sure it >> really matters (and implementation can constrain that as they want to >> anyway). > Not even that actually, as long as you keep reasonably low number of > keys on a device (ideally only one); Exactly. Section 1.1 says The protocol is inapplicable in situations where [...] large numbers of trusted keys are provisioned on a single link at the same time. and Section 4.3 says The HMAC of the packet MUST NOT be computed for each HMAC TLV contained in the packet, but only once for each configured key. I'll see if it can be made clearer. That being said -- Denis Ovsienko and David Schinazi have suggested that the HMAC should be associated with a key-id, a small integer that allows matching provisioned keys with in-packet keys. I'm not a big fan, but I'm willing to add it to the document if people feel strongly about it. -- Juliusz From nobody Sun Jul 29 04:04:21 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: babel@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA56512F295 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 04:04:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.351 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kapsi.fi 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 F2-A2bWmT6Wo for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 04:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.kapsi.fi (mail.kapsi.fi [IPv6:2001:67c:1be8::25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9476C127148 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 04:04:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kapsi.fi; s=20161220; h=To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date: In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=XD4Z6tMnwK33NLDpHdf3jwBJ/HKxJ8y4Ov+JMXtdo48=; b=E0fX10Qf4r0rKHA+BNQJGJIeK/ 1kpWLtWpg8x21YwA+LaG5khiIAYeFc8gV/+IK78vgn5frL4LgCmUMnsLq7Wu62GXAoMNnK15vjHvF 0DadjtyICmRWz67VAwmmwPP6uop1LwG+lKYe2C67R9USgXqgkAdL19Edrs0CZBUkgO/dwwR3mQDdF I2NINx6/UR+w9quH1N0z2zFPDDOTrJNkdQjfZicNjD9mUdoIM2UbJmNJDMl4MR5ePDw2rbs//TsK1 NclAy25SMseOUaqtKLyw1VTvJevOnEG1BUAZrFxbJqNJv7VBo32aBT2NFHWRso7+gvzqGYDscgvQd djgxsPoA==; Received: from 91-155-69-202.elisa-laajakaista.fi ([91.155.69.202] helo=yuri.lan) by mail.kapsi.fi with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fjjUk-0004Y5-PF; Sun, 29 Jul 2018 14:04:14 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Markus Stenberg In-Reply-To: <87lg9ufhon.wl-jch@irif.fr> Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 14:04:13 +0300 Cc: Babel at IETF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <61F58676-2351-43FD-8E01-39DAE87D8CB4@iki.fi> References: <87muubhszo.wl-jch@irif.fr> <7432C9DE-664D-4264-B862-0BD4459DA82B@iki.fi> <61BD929A-C731-422C-875A-BDF31139A385@iki.fi> <87lg9ufhon.wl-jch@irif.fr> To: Juliusz Chroboczek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 91.155.69.202 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: markus.stenberg@iki.fi X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.kapsi.fi); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Archived-At: Subject: Re: [babel] WG adoption call for draft-do-babel-hmac (7/19 - 8/6) X-BeenThere: babel@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "A list for discussion of the Babel Routing Protocol." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2018 11:04:20 -0000 > On 29 Jul 2018, at 13.40, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >>> That said, this design leads to N times more efficient CPU DOS >>> (non-accelerated SHA256 on slow CPU times MTU worth of HMACs =3D = quite >>> a lot of computation on low-end devices). Then again, I am not sure = it >>> really matters (and implementation can constrain that as they want = to >>> anyway). >> Not even that actually, as long as you keep reasonably low number of >> keys on a device (ideally only one); >=20 > Exactly. Section 1.1 says >=20 > The protocol is inapplicable in situations where [...] large = numbers > of trusted keys are provisioned on a single link at the same time. >=20 > and Section 4.3 says >=20 > The HMAC of the packet MUST NOT be computed for each HMAC TLV > contained in the packet, but only once for each configured key. >=20 > I'll see if it can be made clearer. >=20 > That being said -- Denis Ovsienko and David Schinazi have suggested = that > the HMAC should be associated with a key-id, a small integer that = allows > matching provisioned keys with in-packet keys. I'm not a big fan, but = I'm > willing to add it to the document if people feel strongly about it. I think I prefer the current scheme - the most common case should be = exactly 1 key anyway, and corner case =E2=80=98few=E2=80=99 keys (either = during key roll-over, or at some trust domain cross-over point). -Markus=