Hi.

My concern in describing things as diffs to the md5 algorithm in 3414 s
that there's not a well defined abstraction there at that layer.

The SNMP community has been very careful to define rules of procedure
and very well-defined interfaces afor extension and for variability in
SNMP.  When we started work on the transport security model we
considered providing differences to the existing SNMP processing.
It would have been a lot less text.
However, we  were not using proper SNMP extension points in doing so.
Extending SNMP only at its proper extension points helps in reasoning
about SNMP correctness, security, etc.
For the same reason abstraction helps you when coding, it helps you when
working on specifications for large complex systems.

Authentication algorithms in USM are a valid extension point today.
However, as I read 3414, HMAC-based algorithms that work approximately
like hmac-md5 are *not* a well-defined extension point.

I think it is important to create a new extension point that plugs into
the existing extension point of USM authentication algorithm and
provides hmac-based authentication with an extensible hash function.

draft-hartman tries to do that today. draft-hmac does not.

I think it is  important  for SNMP forward evolution that we do that and
only extend at maintainable extension points.
For that reason, regardless of which draft the working group chooses, I
believe it is important to first define a new extension point for
generic hmac-based authentication algorithms that plug into the USM
authentication algorithm extension point in 3414, and then to plug sha-2
into that newly created extension point.

--Sam

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

Reply via email to