From yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp Sun Jan 20 17:27:17 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pana@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pana@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE83F21F87F3 for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:27:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.49 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.49 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XNMs1q5ba+-D for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:27:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from imx12.toshiba.co.jp (imx12.toshiba.co.jp [61.202.160.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 004ED21F87AC for ; Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:27:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from tsbmgw-mgw01.tsbmgw-mgw01.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.232.103]) by imx12.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id r0L1RC5d004682 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:13 +0900 (JST) Received: from tsbmgw-mgw01 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tsbmgw-mgw01.tsbmgw-mgw01.toshiba.co.jp (8.13.8/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r0L1RCpn015075 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:12 +0900 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by tsbmgw-mgw01 (JAMES SMTP Server 2.3.1) with SMTP ID 619 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:12 +0900 (JST) Received: from arc11.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.90.127]) by tsbmgw-mgw01.tsbmgw-mgw01.toshiba.co.jp (8.13.8/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r0L1RBpa015072 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:11 +0900 Received: (from root@localhost) by arc11.toshiba.co.jp id r0L1RBsO009457 for pana@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from ovp11.toshiba.co.jp [133.199.90.148] by arc11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id LAA09455; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:11 +0900 Received: from mx2.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id r0L1RBTG023818 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from tsbpoa.po.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id r0L1RBo1018798; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from [133.196.20.72] by mail.po.toshiba.co.jp (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPSA id <0MGY00J3PC1A4770@mail.po.toshiba.co.jp> for pana@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:11 +0900 (JST) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:10 +0900 From: Yoshihiro Ohba To: pana@ietf.org Message-id: <50FC996E.5050801@toshiba.co.jp> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 Subject: [Pana] "PRF key" in RFC 5191 Section 8.5 X-BeenThere: pana@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 01:27:18 -0000 I got a question from my colleague about meaning of "PRF key" in the following text in Section 8.5: " 1. The PaC and the PAA each are likely to be able to compute a random nonce (according to [RFC4086]). The length of the nonce has to be 1/2 the length of the PRF key (e.g., 10 octets in the case of HMAC-SHA1). 2. The PaC and the PAA each are not trusted with regard to the computation of a random nonce (according to [RFC4086]). The length of the nonce has to have the full length of the PRF key (e.g., 20 octets in the case of HMAC-SHA1). " As far as I remember, "PRF key" means "output block of the negotiated pseudo-random function used in prf+". So HMAC-SHA1 is prf, the output block length is 20 octets. Please let me know if you interpret "PRF key" in the above text in other ways. Best Regards, Yoshihiro Ohba From alper.yegin@yegin.org Thu Jan 24 01:22:11 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: pana@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: pana@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6860221F84DE for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 01:22:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hJ78LE+pqL7q for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 01:22:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B461421F86B7 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 01:22:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.49] (88.247.135.202.static.ttnet.com.tr [88.247.135.202]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus3) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Mh9uD-1UKUaG1qMr-00N4qA; Thu, 24 Jan 2013 04:21:56 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Alper Yegin In-Reply-To: <50FC996E.5050801@toshiba.co.jp> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:21:52 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <48FF7BF6-DB35-4B2B-AAC4-01D7E2672BDE@yegin.org> References: <50FC996E.5050801@toshiba.co.jp> To: Yoshihiro Ohba X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:DjgOpnsKqT8giaCjjzwYaPEPewsV7w4QLdRB2B6kf38 w8PqbzR2uc/RiSypKUJun9Um+30gAA3DQJ6vsezLU21oscrwPk 44ZMtB7Kevx4EO7GvLzb4q3p1SVLKZ7yFwxo6nLyYu3/6/pMxJ AAjefI06IN5cdkyjfhHNdlKMFUToPtI8GMdBuriO15ibJg07a4 JKyo9OYex2cYjMKcIeczcOGCjQtZuyKudavSWVNnnQHP/rHwY2 drvdw0rS3t1m2fc7YyftEiQe5WlBKetpBni4U6wtFpOKH9ib7j ZVGO7jnEns0E8sESW0cVScgF2I9ABFR5wlplzEpH/uPQQ2NPlW DyGMt7q+9rT75eEVTk8nPavk8vmMj8JNM+YJuBYQdF/rR4Yzj4 0szabiBZ1j57g== Cc: pana@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Pana] "PRF key" in RFC 5191 Section 8.5 X-BeenThere: pana@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:22:11 -0000 Yoshi, I think your interpretation is correct, as the "e.g." examples confirm. Alper On Jan 21, 2013, at 3:27 AM, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote: > I got a question from my colleague about meaning of "PRF key" in the > following text in Section 8.5: > > " > 1. The PaC and the PAA each are likely to be able to compute a > random nonce (according to [RFC4086]). The length of the nonce > has to be 1/2 the length of the PRF key (e.g., 10 octets in the > case of HMAC-SHA1). > > 2. The PaC and the PAA each are not trusted with regard to the > computation of a random nonce (according to [RFC4086]). The > length of the nonce has to have the full length of the PRF key > (e.g., 20 octets in the case of HMAC-SHA1). > " > > As far as I remember, "PRF key" means "output block of the negotiated > pseudo-random function used in prf+". So HMAC-SHA1 is prf, the output > block length is 20 octets. > > Please let me know if you interpret "PRF key" in the above text in other > ways. > > Best Regards, > Yoshihiro Ohba > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pana mailing list > Pana@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana