On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 3:29 PM Willem Toorop <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear DNSOP,
>
> A new draft has been submitted addressing the issue of DNS Cookies in
> multi-vendor anycast deployments.
>
> DNS Cookies are currently impractical in such deployments, because one
> implementation - even though it shares its secret with another
> implementation - cannot validate the Server Cookies constructed by that
> other implementation, because their methods for constructing Server
> Cookies differ.
>
> This draft provides precise directions for creating Server Cookies to
> align the implementations.  In doing so, this draft introduces a
> registry for functions suitable for Cookie construction.  More
> specifically, FNV and HMAC-SHA-256-64 are obsoleted and SipHash-2.4 is
> introduced as a suitable function.
>
> Willem
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms-00.txt
> Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 09:12:24 -0700
> From: [email protected]
> To: Willem Toorop <[email protected]>, Ondrej Sury <[email protected]>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Willem Toorop and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:           draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms
> Revision:       00
> Title:          Algorithms for Domain Name System (DNS) Cookies
> construction
> Document date:  2019-03-11
> Group:          Individual Submission
> Pages:          7
> URL:
>
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms-00.txt
> Status:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms/
> Htmlized:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms-00
> Htmlized:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-sury-toorop-dns-cookies-algorithms
>
>
> Abstract:
>    [RFC7873] left the construction of Server Cookies to the discretion
>    of the DNS Server (implementer) which has resulted in a gallimaufry
>    of different implementations.  As a result, DNS Cookies are
>    impractical to deploy on multi-vendor anycast networks, because the
>    Server Cookie constructed by one implementation cannot be validated
>    by another.
>
>    This document provides precise directions for creating Server Cookies
>    to address this issue.  Furthermore, [FNV] is obsoleted as a suitable
>    Hash function for calculating DNS Cookies.  [SipHash-2.4] is
>    introduced as a new REQUIRED Hash function for calculating DNS
>    Cookies.
>
>    This document updates [RFC7873]
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
Small typo:
I would suggest this:
Section 4 4th paragraph:
"implement only a pseudorandom functions for DNS Cookies"
 to
"implement only a pseudorandom function for DNS Cookies"

  [SipHash-2.4] is a pseudorandom function suitable as message
   authentication code, and this document REQUIRES compliant DNS Server
   to use SipHash24 as a mandatory and default algorithm for DNS Cookies
   to ensure interoperability between the DNS Implementations.

Also, I would suggest explaining a little bit the advantages of SipHas-2.4:

fast computation + quite secure up to now.





_______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
>
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to