[ntpwg] Autokey refilihng - my point...

Brian Haberman brian at innovationslab.net
Sun Oct 25 22:18:20 UTC 2009


Todd Glassey wrote:
> Brian - my point in asking to advance the autokey draft is both based in 
> getting NTP further along to its v4 standards status and also in getting 
> the autokey component more formalized than 'an informational' status 
> since its in use in production in many shops around the world, that is 
> no longer appropriate. Autokey as it is implemented today works and is 
> relied on, so we need to get what is out their today documented as an 
> in-place accepted standard.
> If you want to make changes to the protocol itself that's fine but dont 
> hold up acknowledging what's already in pervasive use in the world for 
> secure NTP.

My point is not to hold up the spec, but it can't advance unless it can 
clearly specify how OIDs for the algorithms in use are converted to NIDs 
for use in the Status Word.  The current text refers to an RFC that only 
defines the OIDs for the various Signature and Digest schemes and not 
the NIDs carried by NTP.  This is not changing the protocol, it is 
providing a way to have inter-operable implementations of Autokey.


More information about the ntpwg mailing list