[ntpwg] Problem with Symmetric Key in both NTPv4 and Autokey drafts

[Yaakov Stein]

Danny,

I tend to agree that there are some wording problems here.

First, the wording "described in this report" should probably be fixed to "described in this RFC".

Second, the symmetric key cryptographic algorithm is really NOT described very much here,
however, I guess we can get away with the following three "descriptions"
the following page   :
    finally an optional message authentication code
   (MAC) consisting of the key identifier field and message digest field
page 33
   however, if authentication is implemented, then the MD5 keyed hash algorithm
   described in [RFC1321] must be supported.
page 55
    NTPv4 provides an optional authentication field that utilizes the MD5
   algorithm.

Third, while we are at it, the wording on page 3
       While the NTPv3 symmetric key authentication scheme described in this document has been carried
       over from NTPv3 ...
should really read
       While the symmetric key authentication scheme described in this document has been carried
       over from NTPv3 ...

Finally, I am not sure if we are allowed to reference back to RFC 1305 Appendix C as the source of
the authentication, if this RFC is being obsoleted here. However, if we do, then 1305
should not be listed as an <informative> reference, but rather as a <normative> one.
I think we need Mark's guidance here.

Y(J)S


-----Original Message-----
From: ntpwg-bounces+yaakov_s=rad.com at lists.ntp.org [mailto:ntpwg-bounces+yaakov_s=rad.com at lists.ntp.org] On Behalf Of Danny Mayer
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 9:17 PM
To: David L. Mills
Cc: NTP Working Group
Subject: Re: [ntpwg] Problem with Symmetric Key in both NTPv4 and Autokey drafts

Dave,

I'll let someone else pipe up about this with their view. It may just be me.

Danny
David L. Mills wrote:
> Danny,
>
> I thought the symmetric key description was clear from context. If you
> think otherwise, please feel free to modifiy the documents or provide
> markup.
>
> Dave
>
> Danny Mayer wrote:
>
>> I have been reading the autokey draft and it mentions the symmetric
>> key authentication referencing the NTPv3 RFC 1305. See P7 Section 3 item 1.
>> However that RFC is obsoleted by both the NTPv4 draft and the autokey
>> draft (though I'm not sure an Informational RFC can obsolete a
>> standards track RFC). The NTPv4 draft mentions in Section 7.3 (P.17)
>> that symmetric key it is described in the draft when it does not. It
>> looks like we need to pull parts of RFC 1305 Appendix C into the
>> NTPv4 draft if that's what needs to be copied. I missed this
>> yesterday when going through the document.
>>
>> Sorry to hold things up, but that's an important piece of the NTPv4
>> protocol.
>>
>> Danny
_______________________________________________
ntpwg mailing list
ntpwg at lists.ntp.org
https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg