Subject: [Ipsec] RFC 4109 on Algorithms for Internet Key Exchange version 1 (IKEv1)

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 09:43:50 -0700

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

         RFC 4109

         Title:      Algorithms for Internet Key Exchange version 1
                     (IKEv1)
         Author(s):  P. Hoffman
         Status:     Standards Track
         Date:       May 2005
         Mailbox:    [email-masked]
         Pages:      5
         Characters: 9491
         Updates:    2409

         I-D Tag:    draft-hoffman-ikev1-algorithms-03.txt

         URL:        ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4109.txt

The required and suggested algorithms in the original Internet Key
Exchange version 1 (IKEv1) specification do not reflect the current
reality of the IPsec market requirements.  The original specification
allows weak security and suggests algorithms that are thinly
implemented.  This document updates RFC 2409, the original
specification, and is intended for all IKEv1 implementations deployed
today.

This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol.

This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for
the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the
"Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the
standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution
of this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list.
Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list
should be sent to [email-masked].  Requests to be
added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should
be sent to [email-masked].

Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending
an EMAIL message to [email-masked] with the message body
help: ways_to_get_rfcs.  For example:

         To: [email-masked]
         Subject: getting rfcs

         help: ways_to_get_rfcs

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to [email-masked].  Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.

Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to
[email-masked].  Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC
Authors, for further information.

Joyce K. Reynolds and Sandy Ginoza
USC/Information Sciences Institute

...

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant Mail Reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version
of the RFCs.

[The following attachment must be fetched by mail. Command-click the 
URL below and send the resulting message to get the attachment.]
<mailto:[email-masked]?body=RETRIEVE:%20rfc%0D%0ADOC-ID:%20rfc4109>
[The following attachment must be fetched by ftp.  Command-click the 
URL below to ask your ftp client to fetch it.]
<ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc4109.txt>
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

_______________________________________________
Ipsec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

---

From: Yoav Nir <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 11:58:58 +0300

Hi.

This has probably been discussed before, but I couldn't find it in 
either the draft or the mailing list archive.

The Integrity Checksum Data field in the Encrypted payload is described 
as having a length as specified by the integrity algorithm. All the 
integrity algorithms are those that are also specified for ESP.  In 
ESP, the hash value is truncated to 96 bits (hence the _96 suffix in 
all their names)

In IKEv1 we did not truncate the hash value for IKE, only for ESP.  Has 
this changed for IKEv2?  Are we supposed to use only the first 96 bits 
for MD5 and SHA1, or should we keep using the full untruncated value?

Thanks

Yoav