Hi,

I have the impression the recommendation goes beyond the scope of IKEv2 and
is more targeting Certificates. On the other hand, having these
requirements would make all cryptographic requirements fit into a single
document IKEv2 As a result, I would rather have a section with a link to a
document that contains requirements that are specific to the Certificates.

I am also wondering if the IKEv2 spec should not also point to that
document.

BR,
Daniel

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Tero Kivinen <[email protected]> wrote:

> During the draft-ietf-lwig-ikev2-minimal Stephen pointed out that in
> my draft I have copied requirements from the RFC7296:
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...
>    For an implementation to be called conforming to this specification,
>    it MUST be possible to configure it to accept the following:
>
>    o  Public Key Infrastructure using X.509 (PKIX) Certificates
>       containing and signed by RSA keys of size 1024 or 2048 bits, where
>       the ID passed is any of ID_KEY_ID, ID_FQDN, ID_RFC822_ADDR, or
>       ID_DER_ASN1_DN.
> ...
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> And he pointed out that this asks for mandatory to implemented key
> size for RSA to be 1024 or 2048-bits.
>
> It is not up to the ikev2-minimal to change these, but RFC4307bis is
> different thing.
>
> I.e. should we modify this also while updating the RFC4307? We could
> add section about the mandatory to implement authentication methods,
> and specify which methods are to be used, for example require RSA key
> lengths of 2048 bits, and perhaps say that implementations SHOULD
> support RSA key lengths up to 4096 bits.
>
> For the elliptic curves we might want to say something about signature
> authentication method (RFC 7427) as that supports generic elliptic
> curves not only the nist versions. Also should we say something about
> the RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 vs RSASSA-PSS?
> --
> [email protected]
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to