AH or ESP
Merike Kaeo
kaeo at merike.com
Mon May 25 21:03:19 UTC 2009
Yeah - the main issue with using ESP is that there's a trailer at end
of packet that tells you more info to determine whether you can
inspect the packet. So you have to look at the end of the packet to
see whether ESP is using encryption or null-encryption (i.e. just
integrity protection). Some vendors do have proprietary mechanisms
in software for now which doesn't scale. The work below will
hopefully lock into a solution where hw can be built to quickly
determine if ESP is used for integrity only.
AH is not really widely used (except for OSPFv3 since early
implementations locked in on AH when the standard said to use IPsec
for integrity protection). Note that a subsequent standard now
exists which explicitly states that ESP-Null MUST be supported and AH
MAY be supported. But how many folks are actually running OSPF for a
v6 environment and using IPsec to protect the communicating peers?
Some but not many (yet).
Personally, I'd stick with ESP. AH complicates matters
(configuration, nested environments when you do decide to also use
ESP for encryption maybe later, NAT) and while is isn't officially
deprecated vendors don't test it as much as ESP - at interoperability
tests it's not stressed, at least the ones I've been to. Ask your
vendor(s) what they think of the work below and see where they stand
with implementing it.
Be happy to answer any more questions offline.
- merike
On May 25, 2009, at 6:24 AM, Jack Kohn wrote:
> Glen,
>
> IPSECME WG <http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ipsecme-charter.html>
> at IETF
> is actually working on the exact issue that you have described
> (unable to
> deep inspect ESP-NULL packets).
>
> You can look at
> draft-ietf-ipsecme-traffic-visibility-02<http://tools.ietf.org/html/
> draft-ietf-ipsecme-traffic-visibility-02>for
> more details.
>
> Jack
>
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Glen Kent <glen.kent at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Yes, thats what i had meant !
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Christopher Morrow
>> <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Glen Kent <glen.kent at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> It is well known in the community that AH is NAT unfriendly
>>>> while ESP
>>>> cannot
>>>> be filtered, and most firewalls would not let such packets pass.
>>>> I am
>>>> NOT
>>>
>>> 'the content of the esp packet can't be filtered in transit' I think
>>> you mean... right?
>>>
>>>> interested in encrypting the data, but i do want origination
>>>> authentication
>>>> (Integrity Protection). Do folks in such cases use AH or ESP-NULL,
> given
>>>> that both have some issues?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Glen
>>>>
>>
>>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list