On 19-jun-2006, at 14:32, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
I just submitted an I-D on TCP-MD5 key change. Until it shows up
in the
official repository, see
http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb/papers/draft-bellovin-
keyroll2385-00.txt
Here's the abstract:
The TCP-MD5 option is most commonly used to secure
BGP sessions between routers. However, changing
the long-term key is difficult, since the change
needs to be synchronized between different
organizations.
We describe single-ended strategies that will permit
(mostly) unsynchronized key changes.
Comments welcome.
I wonder how long that policy will hold. (-:
Ok:
First of all, I applaud this effort.
There doesn't really seem to be a way to introduce a new key other
than to just to agree on a time. I'm not sure this is good enough.
Wouldn't it be better to exchange some kind of "time to change keys"
message? This could simply be a new type of BGP message that hold a
key ID. Obviously the capability to send and receive these messages
must be negotiated when the session is created, but still, I think
the extra complexity is worth it because it allows for much more
robust operation.
And is NANOG now officially an IETF working group...?
Iljitsch