[Acme] Adoption of draft-sipos-acme-dtnnodeid
"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Thu, 13 August 2020 15:27 UTC
Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: acme@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503B13A0DC2 for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 08:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UlYdhbPuAo6y for <acme@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 08:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8F7F3A0DAA for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 08:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050093.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07DFJ0VZ027935 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:27:41 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=NcGWkvNbRxl/RUyQRSSsaVvhcg0RVUXiQjml5kkTXY4=; b=VNZggVIIhimBv96j+wAQMtn/SDXp8scZ5VusfKw2zRd6aPkUWJHyKrbOew/fqwoG4kxO kGBob7itJhBiq7vcgLmOIB3I/sm8dxcKNL0gdf9So6Io2xES+EurrOmxZikRbKegv8TI BlVGfTbGGHIZl6118WxtLslXYX2FHKrqgchqwBfQ6rr8Z0bGTkjgBMfMWawDB9Y/73x4 nc5bnEitVb+/jgGRVJDAUoqG0EEfsyszS29xW5oFd/1v+PMTu3z25BiqtOuwkSz/ubqc n8wpmFqakMVaJAyTHkWDAa66mXzw9roaRnfNtqd33ecXUqjvQRgmvb2AYoqBGWagbo0I fw==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint8 (a72-247-45-34.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [72.247.45.34] (may be forged)) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 32sm7xgyj0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:27:41 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 07DFL5Zo011862 for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 11:27:40 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.118]) by prod-mail-ppoint8.akamai.com with ESMTP id 32sqcxr72n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for <acme@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 11:27:40 -0400
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.165.119) by ustx2ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.165.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 10:27:39 -0500
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.119]) by ustx2ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.119]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 10:27:39 -0500
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: "acme@ietf.org" <acme@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Adoption of draft-sipos-acme-dtnnodeid
Thread-Index: AQHWcYZHYxiEoRVBxEikBJ0z0+R8aQ==
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:27:39 +0000
Message-ID: <844E6E02-7C24-46E0-BF4D-460AA5B666C1@akamai.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.39.20071300
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.33.146]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_844E6E027C2446E0BF4D460AA5B666C1akamaicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-08-13_13:2020-08-13, 2020-08-13 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=609 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2008130116
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-08-13_14:2020-08-13, 2020-08-13 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=556 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2008130116
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/acme/hogbNad2D_5w_4MyUOCb1a7mXKU>
Subject: [Acme] Adoption of draft-sipos-acme-dtnnodeid
X-BeenThere: acme@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Automated Certificate Management Environment <acme.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/acme/>
List-Post: <mailto:acme@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme>, <mailto:acme-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 15:27:43 -0000
At IETF 108, we discussed https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sipos-acme-dtnnodeid/ The minutes of that discussion are below (thanks again Yaron) Should we adopt this document? At the meeting there was mild interest to do so. Please reply by end of next week. Brian Sipos on DTN (delay-tolerant networking) Draft Roman: are DTN nodes on the public Internet? Or closed network? Brian: no need for ACME if on a closed network. CA probably integrated in DTN. Sites have gateway nodes into the open Internet. Connecting to a public (not necessarily commercial) CA. Rick (DTN chair): are you offering to publish in ACME as an Experimental doc, or keep it within DTN? Brian: intend to keep in DTN. Use of URI validation is new to ACME. Rick: ACME is possibly a good way to resolve existing IESG discusses. Can take it off-line. Roman: would ACME servers have understanding of DTN identifiers? Brian: they would need to be DTN nodes. Just like the ACME server that implements the SMTP validation draft. Use case is inter-site DTN. Node is accepting bundles from other domains, lower trust exists. Yoav: ACME servers are CAs. They are reluctant to provide service to anything other than the normal web use case. Brian: no expectation of uptake in generic ACME servers. Rich: precedent for non-web use cases [missed specifics]. Rick: DTN is a small focused WG, not sure they have the bandwidth to take it on. Would be happy if ACME does. Brian: and this is so similar to SMTP. YN: hum? Roman: ask re: familiarity. YN: we know the answer. Hum: have you read it? pianissimo. YN: will not ask on adoption. Alexey: ask who is willing to review. Chat: Melinda, Russ, Rich, Alexey, Yoav. YN: let's read, then maybe have a call for adoption.
- [Acme] Adoption of draft-sipos-acme-dtnnodeid Salz, Rich
- Re: [Acme] Adoption of draft-sipos-acme-dtnnodeid Russ Housley