That looks like an oversight at least wrt RFC 4869.
 
Chairs (of ipsecme) and Pasi (AD) - is a new RFC needed to
allocate this value, or is there a lower overhead and faster
means of getting this done?

Thanks,
--David


 


________________________________

        From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Soo-Fei Chew
        Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 3:11 PM
        To: [email protected]
        Subject: Re: [IPsec] transform id for ESP GMAC for IKEv1 Phase2
        
        

        Hi

         

        If AES-GMAC is 'Not Supported" in IKEv1, then in RFC4869

         

              3.3. Suite "Suite-B-GMAC-128"
...................................4

              3.4. Suite "Suite-B-GMAC-256"
...................................5

         

        The mentioning of IKEv1 is not applicable at all!

         

        Thanks,

        SooFei

         

        
________________________________


        From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
        Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 11:40 AM
        To: Soo-Fei Chew; [email protected]
        Subject: RE: [IPsec] transform id for ESP GMAC for IKEv1 Phase2

         

        Hmm - the IKEv1 (actually ISAKMP) and IKEv2 encryption

        algorithm registries appear to have diverged, starting

        with the value 21 (e.g., Camellia in CBC mode has

        different values in the two registries).

         

        The current answer for GMAC usage in IKEv1 appears to

        be "Not Supported".  In order to change this, IANA

        would need to be directed to allocate a new value in

        the appropriate ISAKMP registry.

        Thanks,
        --David
        
        ----------------------------------------------------
        David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
        EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
        +1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
        [email protected]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
        ----------------------------------------------------

                
________________________________


                From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Soo-Fei Chew
                Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 4:15 PM
                To: [email protected]
                Subject: [IPsec] transform id for ESP GMAC for IKEv1
Phase2

                Hi

                 

                Per RFC4543, section 9, for ike v2 the ESP Phase 2
transform ID is 21 but it doesn't specify for IKEv1.  If I use 21 for
ikev1, it conflicts with RFC4196 section 5.2.

                Please advise what to put as transform ID for ESP IKEv1.

                 

                Thanks,

                SooFei

                 

                Soo-Fei Chew   
                Senior Engineer
                Mocana Corporation
                 

                
                Securing the Internet of Things
                Request a free trial of Mocana's software at  <http://> 
http://www.mocana.com/evaluate.html 

                [email protected]

                350 Samsome Street Suite 1010,

                San Francisco, CA 94105

                p +1 415 617 0055 ext. 3011

                f +1 415 617 0056
                
                Confidentiality Notice:  The information contained in
this electronic transmission is confidential, and may be protected from
disclosure under applicable law.  This transmission is intended only for
the use of the individual to whom it is addressed.  If you are not the
addressee, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this
transmission to the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by
telephone at the telephone number above, and destroy this transmission
in its entirety.  Any use, dissemination, review, distribution,
disclosure, copying or taking of any action whatsoever in reliance upon
or in connection with the contents of this transmission is strictly
prohibited.

                 

<<image001.jpg>>

_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to