Re: [midcom] SNMPv3 as MIDCOM protocol: Opinions?
Michael Thomas <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.snmpv3 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Randy Presuhn writes: > > From: Michael Thomas <[email protected]> > > Irrelevant, but IKE,KINK/IPsec and TLS fit your > > definition. This working group decided for its > > own reasons that app layer auth/priv/authz was > > required. As such, none of the usual suspects can > > be used for key management for those SA. We are > > left with a void. This manifestly causes trouble > > with generally poorly conceived and reviewed > > stopgaps. > ... > > I guess I'm being unusually dense today. Could you explain how > the IKE,KINK/IPsec and TLS combination delivers the initial > authentication material ("who is superuser and how do I > recognize them") to a virgin box in a wiring closet somewhere? This is quite a gloss on the enrollment problem. There is a vast difference between star topology enrollment O(n) and Hamiltonian enrollment O(n^2) (or it's NxM cousin, "galaxy" topology enrollment). IKE/TLS/KINK all provide O(n) enrollment which can scale to very large numbers. SNMPv3's enrollment is always point to point which ranges from O(n) to O(n^2) with no means of dealing with O(n^2) kinds of problems. Also: public key identities give the ability to use leap-of-faith kinds of enrollment schemes to make an explicit tradeoff of explicit positive identification for initial enrollment vs ease of deployment (cf SSH). Lack of public key identities for SNMPv3 makes that essentially impossible. > This is the only part of SNMPv3 key management that is not > addressed by the SNMPv3 protocol and MIBs. > > (I'd also be curious to learn how the IKE/KINK/IPsec/TLS > combination addresses the question of access control > management. It might be obvious to you, but I don't see > it yet.) RFC 2401 defines an access control mechanism for ACL-based filtering. I never claimed that it was granular enough for VACM/USM access control, but to imply that IPsec cannot provide access control is flat out wrong. Mike