Subject: [IPsec] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-kent-ipsecme-ah-rfc4302bis-00.txt

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 16:06:14 -0500

updated versions of RFC 4301, 4302, and 4303 have been posted:

         Title         : IP Authentication Header (AH)
         Author(s)     : S. Kent
         Filename      : draft-kent-ipsecme-ah-rfc4302bis
         Pages         : 35
         Date          : Nov. 19, 2013
         
      This document describes an updated version of the IP Authentication
        Header (AH), which is designed to provide authentication services in
        IPv4 and IPv6.  This document obsoletes RFC 4302.

    A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
    http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kent-ipsecme-ah-rfc4302bis-00.txt

    Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
    ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

         Title         : Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol
         Author(s)     : S. Kent
         Filename      : draft-kent-ipsecme-saforip-rfc4301bis
         Pages         : 104
         Date          : Nov. 19, 2013
         
       This document describes an updated version of the &quot;Security
        Architecture for IP&quot;, which is designed to provide security services
        for traffic at the IP layer.  This document obsoletes RFC 4301 and
        6040.

    A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
    http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kent-ipsecme-saforip-rfc4301bis-00.txt

    Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
    ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

         Title         : IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)
         Author(s)     : S. Kent
         Filename      : draft-kent-ipsecme-esp-rfc4303bis
         Pages         : 46
         Date          : Nov. 19, 2013
         
        This document describes an updated version of the Encapsulating
        Security Payload (ESP) protocol, which is designed to provide a mix
        of security services in IPv4 and IPv6.  ESP is used to provide
        confidentiality, data origin authentication, connectionless
        integrity, an anti-replay service (a form of partial sequence
        integrity), and limited traffic flow confidentiality.  This document
        obsoletes RFC 4303.

    A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
    http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kent-ipsecme-esp-rfc4303bis-00.txt

    Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
    ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Yaron Sheffer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:08:14 +0200

> updated versions of RFC 4301, 4302, and 4303 have been posted:
Thank you Steve for working on these drafts. These drafts are targeted 
at republication as Internet Standards. As promised in Vancouver, I 
would like to open the question of whether we should be republishing RFC 
4302 - AH.

My personal opinion is that we should not. We have downgraded AH and 
consistently discouraged its use, replacing it by ESP-null. People are 
obviously free to implement it even if it remains Proposed Standard, but 
why give the wrong message by promoting it to IS?

Thanks,
	Yaron

---

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 17:17:35 -0500

Yaron,

I think we should progress it to FS only if there are other protocols 
that make use
of it, and which are really in use in a non-trivial fashion. I think 
Sean said that he identified some such protocols when he was exploring 
this topic, so we should ask Sean
for details.

Steve
> would like to open the question of whether we should be republishing 
> RFC 4302 - AH.
>
> obviously free to implement it even if it remains Proposed Standard, 
> but why give the wrong message by promoting it to IS?
>
> Thanks,
>     Yaron
>

---

From: Yaron Sheffer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:23:57 +0200

Hi Steve,

I'm fine with what you say. Just a quick comment on process: we don't 
have FS (Full Standard) any more. Since RFC 6410, we have "Proposed 
Standard" and "Internet Standard".

Thanks,
	Yaron

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 15:36:08 +0000

On Nov 19, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Yaron Sheffer <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Thank you Steve for working on these drafts. These drafts are targeted at republication as Internet Standards. As promised in Vancouver, I would like to open the question of whether we should be republishing RFC 4302 - AH.
> 
> My personal opinion is that we should not. We have downgraded AH and consistently discouraged its use, replacing it by ESP-null. People are obviously free to implement it even if it remains Proposed Standard, but why give the wrong message by promoting it to IS?

I agree with that.

	paul

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:38:49 -0500

>> My personal opinion is that we should not. We have downgraded AH and consistently discouraged its use, replacing it by ESP-null. People are obviously free to implement it even if it remains Propos…

My thinking around also uplifting AH to IS was based on conversations with authors of the following draft when it came to the IESG:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pim-rfc4601-update-survey-report/

I’m double checking that they did in fact implement AH based on RFC 4601 or whether they implemented ESP based on RFC 5796.  I like to propose that we postpone the discussion of progressing AH until I report back, but I would like to proceed with moving 4301 and 4303 to IS.  The only real difference is that downrefs to RFC 4302 will need to be called out in the IETF LCs to other drafts.

spt