On Fri, Jan 2, 2026 at 8:50 AM Jun Hu (Nokia) <jun.hu=
[email protected]> wrote:

> I personally agree to get rid of AH; however if we consider the impact, it
> is more than just IPsec, there are some non-ipsec protocols today still
> allow to use AH (along with ESP) like OSPFv3 (RFC4552), MIPv6 (RFC6275),
> there might other others
>

Hi Jun,

That's a good point. Do you know of anyone using AH with routing
protocols? If someone is using it is there any reason they could use ESP or
ESP-NULL instead?

Tom


>
> *From:* Tom Herbert <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Friday, January 2, 2026 8:16 AM
> *To:* Steffen Klassert <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL <[email protected]>; Paul Wouters <
> [email protected]>; [email protected]
> *Subject:* [IPsec] Re: [EXT] Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for
> draft-herbert-deprecate-auth-header-00.txt
>
>
>
> You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn
> why this is important <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
>
>
>
>
>
> *CAUTION:* This is an external email. Please be very careful when
> clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for
> additional information.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2026, 4:25 AM Steffen Klassert <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 01, 2026 at 06:13:17AM +0000, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL
> wrote:
> > >> Do you remember why consensus wasn't reached? Unless there's a good
> > >> reason, I would like to remove support for AH from Linux.
> > >
> > > The people thought they had good reasons.
> >
> >
> > Not a good argument - nobody (normally) argues believing his reasons are
> bad. The real reasons for AH existence have died long ago - and I’ve been
> there when AH was initially created, so yes I do know.
> >
> >
> > > There were various use cases and saving bytes compared to esp-null
> mattered.
> >
> > No valid use cases now, AFAIK - and while saving bytes might make some
> sense, I’d say - not in this case.
>
> Some people still use it because it authenticates the constant
> fields of the outer IP header, this can't be done with ESP.
>
>
>
> Hi Steffen,
>
>
>
> Is this a fact that people are using AH or a conjecture that people might
> be using it? :-)
>
>
>
> Also, I'm not sure there's really any value in authenticating the constant
> fields of IP header. The constant fields are just addresses, version,
> length (IHL and total), next protocol. With the exception of the addresses,
> any modifications to the other fields inflight would most likely result in
> dropped packets especially if ESP or Transport security is also in use. The
> addresses of course are routinely changed in NAT, so use of AH could
> prevent the use of NAT in the path. That point was brought up on 6man where
> AH could be used to discourage the use of NAT with IPv6. I'm doubtful
> anyone is actually using AH for that purpose.
>
>
>
>
> > >> If no one’s using AH then the code is nothing more than a liability
> and
> > >> maintenance headache. Granted, we don't need formal deprecation of AH
> > >> to do that, but I would prefer to keep Linux and IETF on the same
> page.
> >
> > And it’s about time to turn that page over. 😉
>
> I'd be more than happy to get rid of AH in the Linux Kernel, and an
> official deprecation by the IETF would help a lot.
>
>
>
> Sounds good. I believe the first step will be to disable compilation of AH
> by default in Kconfig with a nice warning that AH is being deprecated. I'll
> post a patch shortly.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > > I thought Linux didn’t break APIs. You can ask the Linux IPsec
> maintainer,
> > > he is on this list and will read this too.
> > > My impression was even if the IETF obsoleted it, Linux wouldn't remove
> it.
> >
> >
> > Let’s hope he’ll jump in. BTW, breaking changes do happen, as I observed
> myself when I was working with/on Linux.
>
> Breaking changes do happen, but we should not break things
> intentionally. We need to make sure that all still valid
> use cases are covered somewhere else, then we can start
> the deprecation process in the IETF and the Linux Kernel.
>
>
>
> AFAICT, ESP or transport layer security adequately covers all
> practical use cases.
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
>
> Steffen
>
>
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to