Re: [Anima] Moving forward with draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane

Eric Rescorla <> Tue, 23 June 2020 12:02 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D95643A1886 for <>; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 05:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p3EUQnaZscwK for <>; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 05:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FF063A0C23 for <>; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 05:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id y11so23119079ljm.9 for <>; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 05:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=07fdbtFmRVT3e5fSOV4Lz4QcTh4OMKMjE30NlmCbdhg=; b=FDNnVfhORmjRPiASSQJaiZieg975sdZQ+Y7KQoWQFXn8w2HsOuAHr4/Fi5A9yNXUHh yScD/Q73nHwjCC09f3n4v4U2KBb11MggtEFa40yLDQ4omhFM4zYsqEvBgLp0e6rIbG59 KwDfJN1yKNa79JbBjLP0dKhjqjE9pwOcE0sxtPdpg9eSe+czGB59MRtSlqoPJ1bJSQ2z BgeTNX6tZ/DjXmryZ9pF6CZ2zoXGWic/ial08WRzmblRPphEN1kbDj3V8RXU0P0tv/c3 JAtyQ8W/jIv+AiCEj+dgtXN8o9/LZPihjlco/J3N7pzD5DCaqE2Q3CU2EcgEWV7jhgXd fgFQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=07fdbtFmRVT3e5fSOV4Lz4QcTh4OMKMjE30NlmCbdhg=; b=tpVL3DhzqsmeuU9+5r10gXajFki+y/esZMutdydboJOnG3ZlhfHJYRCsUvrZtdIbf4 p4f3J2EsAOeCjE5z1FGZUvb5Kmm0FCo/IGVex8LSou8iCQCyuNzz/CtFlkoFJxLuFDNq DciZxTbTXJBu2MJUIzBP2iwCsahs6+GiR2o1QMgyLWsbD4KSc3XZVt398a2kPS4SdxpT E/BJcT2N9CbGqnifVsY9yqpofAcFaSpKTtc/cZZv+1uAjcjIzMkRLhbJVPbiGLT+sLWa d7oK4lVF4w9Uukv2pt7sQn9NXoBgPq0lLZMlACmUmslwgDMBFPPxUecSPegZHTbzDu+x JNMw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530YajuRXuWaMPnEE9kASbK/3aVkJUhZba/Ax/p+NRVL4PwImfMt vocc1ka3SZIeyWNBpQyesD95bd8x6jvYbIzcS4XPTw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxvwyHSla4vLY4ca2Sb0zFjbZ4/ftVCQcxaILdaeQLPe/9Nds/eaf0A00r6n0WJx17YINcdi1rkfxN8y6bBwlM=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:81d4:: with SMTP id s20mr10991562ljg.184.1592913744420; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 05:02:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Eric Rescorla <>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 05:01:48 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Eliot Lear <>
Cc: Benjamin Kaduk <>, Eric Vyncke <>, Stephen Kent <>, Anima WG <>, "" <>, "" <>, "Joel M. Halpern" <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e4f66405a8bf21c4"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Moving forward with draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 12:02:28 -0000

On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 11:51 PM Eliot Lear <> wrote:

> Hi Ben
> On 23 Jun 2020, at 05:31, Benjamin Kaduk <> wrote:
> Russ has been helping reach out to more of the PKIX community; one
> suggestion that came up so far is to consider defining a dedicated URI
> scheme and using a uniformResourceIdentifier SAN -- did the WG consider
> that in the initial discussions?
> I don’t know if the group looked at this, but I can say that from a public
> CA standpoint, it’s not much different from otherName because there is a
> requirement to validate the name.  A new URI scheme would require a new
> resolution mechanism.  Perhaps that is needed as part of ACP *anyway*.
> The one value of URI is that it is easier to configure in some of the
> tooling like OpenSSL.
> What disturbs me about all of this is that public CAs will accept
> otherNames and produce garbage out.  That’s just asking for a boot to the
> head* from a vulnerability perspective.

This would at present appear to violate the BRs. S says:

Contents: This extension MUST contain at least one entry. Each entry MUST
be either a dNSName containing the Fully-Qualified Domain Name or an
iPAddress containing the IP address of a server. The CA MUST confirm that
the Applicant controls the Fully-Qualified Domain Name or IP address or has
been granted the right to use it by the Domain Name Registrant or IP
address assignee, as appropriate.