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