Re: [Lwip] [IPsec] draft-ietf-lwig-minimal-esp shepherd writeup

On Mon, 22 Mar 2021, Mohit Sethi M wrote:

> Adding Ben (IPsecME AD) and Erik (LWIG AD) to the CC list for an early heads up.
> 
> Thanks for reviewing the document. I'll let the authors provide answers to your review.
> 
> On the procedural side of things: this document is within the LWIG charter (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/lwig/charter/) and follows the path taken by Minimal IKEv2 which was also completed in LWIG as RFC
> 7815 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7815/).
> 
> During the call for adoption, there was a general consensus to proceed in LWIG while keeping close contacts with IPsecME (as well as an agreement to issue a joint last call). Tero
> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/Shf2oUKvtIsb0uzY2zRwuBurm58/), Valery (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/p1i4hZBjn7PD3ksS9kh8C0ouUOU/) and Scott
> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/dF3eZXG8GTV-o7aH4BnFk2zlR6c/) for example provided reviews of the draft.

Thanks for the write up here.

> I think your comments during the adoption (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/xDcICiuALZ2ExF3qwRCnhCQC3A0/) did not argue moving this draft to IPsecME (unless I missed something):
> 
> If the document is defining a minimum/battery optimized ESP
> configuartion, I have no problems with it and I will review further
> text and welcome adoption. If it makes changes to the ESP protocol,
> then I think there should be more discussion before adoption.
> 
> Paul

I said that, but I think I am seeing changes to the ESP algorithm that
basically constitute a change to the ESP protocol. Furthermore, a bunch
of advise negating the advise in RFC 8223. And I still haven't heard
a justfication of some issues I raised either. Such as the doing a
full IKE exchange yet not being able to generate 4 bytes of random?

> That being said, I am not fundamentally opposed to moving this document to IPsecME. However, it is important to consider that the document has already had a relatively long lifecycle in LWIG.

After you references I had given feedback, I went back and read that
message. I totally forgot I did that two years ago. But all the issues
I raised back then are still there unresolved.

Paul