Subject: [VRRP] Security Issues with VRRP. (Final Proposal)

From: Mukesh Gupta <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 19:31:36 -0800

Folks,

I wanted to finalize what to do about the security issues in VRRP. On the basis of the
discussions we had, this is what my conclusion is:

- Clear text authentication doesn't provide any security to VRRP and instead of
helping in cases of mis-configuration, it makes the situation worse by having 2
masters.

- IPsec AH security might help a little bit in some cases (as discussed on the list)
but the current draft doesn't provide enough details to implement it. We have been
looking for volunteers to complete this for long time and the draft has not been able
to make any process because there is not enough interest in the WG. It is questionable
that the work needed in order to complete this, is worth the security it will provide.

This is what my final proposal is in order to move forward in a timely manner:

===
We remove the security completely from VRRP (both v2 and v3) and write a good security
consideration section about why it is not needed. Then we can independently work on a
separate draft (providing there is enough interest) about providing IPsec AH security
to VRRP. IPsec is supposed to provide transparent security to the applications like
VRRP anyway. So ideally, it shouldn't affect VRRP specs.
===

I wanted to take the final comments from the WG members. Please raise your voice, if
you have problems with this proposal. I will wait for a week (till 27th Feb) and if I
don't hear enough resistence, we will move ahead with this proposal.

Thanks,
Mukesh

_______________________________________________
vrrp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp