ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: 'Key Change Strategies for TCP-MD5' to Informational RFC (draft-bellovin-keyroll2385)

2006-10-05 08:49:18
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:34:52 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum
<iljitsch(_at_)muada(_dot_)com> wrote:

On 4-okt-2006, at 16:30, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:

Having read the draft, I do have similar concerns with "double-ended"
operations.  The draft mentions that the new key should only be used
when it's "at a point where it is reasonably certain that the other
side would have it installed, too".  This is not very exact language,
and I wonder how implementations would handle this.

My intention, actually, was that operators would do that.  "Attention
customers: we will be installing the 2007 BGP key on January 15.   
Please
install the new key on your end before then." -- and then you  
actually do
your end on Jan 20 or thereabouts.

My perspective:

...

I don't know that I agree with the details of your scenario, but that's
irrelevant to my larger point: it isn't the implementation that decides,
it's people.

I also agree that it's better that everything be completely automated.  As
the I-D says, this is advice on an interim solution until we can engineer
and deploy something better.


                --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf