Re: [auth48] [EXTERNAL] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9481 <draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-algorithms-15> for your review

[Mike Ounsworth <[e-mail]>]

Hi Hendrik,

Looks like we still have some editorial work to do here.

If my understanding of AUTH48 is correct, then we only have 48 hours to make these changes? This is a particularly bad week for me as I’m travelling for the ICMC FIPS conference.

---
Mike Ounsworth

From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2023 1:18 AM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Mike Ounsworth <[e-mail]>; John Gray <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: AUTH48: RFC-to-be 9481 <draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-algorithms-15> for your review

Authors, While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary) the following questions, which are also in the XML file. 1) <!-- [rfced] The algorithms must be supported to conform with what? Please clarify. Original: 


Authors,



While reviewing this document during AUTH48, please resolve (as necessary)

the following questions, which are also in the XML file.



1) <!-- [rfced] The algorithms must be supported to conform with what?

Please clarify.



Original:

   RFC 4210 Appendix D.2 [RFC4210] contains a set of algorithms,

   mandatory to be supported by conforming implementations.



Perhaps:

   It is mandatory for implementations conformant with CMP to support the

   set of algorithms defined in Appendix D.2 of [RFC4210].

-->





2) <!--[rfced] Should "cryptoanalysis" be updated to be "cryptanalysis"?



Original:

  In general, new attacks are emerging due to research

  cryptoanalysis or increase in computing power.



Perhaps:

  In general, new attacks are emerging due to research

  cryptanalysis or increase in computing power.

-->





3) <!-- [rfced] Should "(SHAKEs)" be "(XOF)"?  Or is "SHAKEs" an example of an XOF?



Original:

   The SHA-3 family of hash functions is defined in FIPS Pub 202

   [NIST.FIPS.202] and includes fixed output length variants SHA3-224,

   SHA3-256, SHA3-384, and SHA3-512, as well as extendable-output

   functions (SHAKEs) SHAKE128 and SHAKE256.



Perhaps:

   The SHA-3 family of hash functions is defined in FIPS Pub 202

   [NIST_FIPS_202] and includes fixed output length variants SHA3-224,

   SHA3-256, SHA3-384, and SHA3-512, as well as extendable-output

   functions (XOFs) such as SHAKE128 and SHAKE256.

-->





4) <!--[rfced] Should instances of "ECDSA signature algorithm" and "EdDSA

signature algorithm" be updated to read simply "ECDSA" and "EdDSA" to avoid

redundancy? If expanded, "ECDSA signature algorithm" would read "Elliptic

Curve Digital Signature Algorithm signature algorithm" and "EdDSA signature

algorithm" would read "Edwards-curve Digital Signature Algorithm signature

algorithm". Please review and let us know if any updates are needed.

-->





5) <!--[rfced] May we expand "SECP" as "Standard for Efficient Cryptography"?



Original:

   As specified in RFC 5480 [RFC5480] the NIST-recommended SECP curves

   are identified by the following OIDs:

-->





6) <!-- [rfced] Please review whether any of the notes in this document

should be in the <aside> element. It is defined as "a container for

content that is semantically less important or tangential to the

content that surrounds it" (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://authors.ietf.org/en/rfcxml-vocabulary*aside__;Iw!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdosEmHCWn$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/authors.ietf.org/en/rfcxml-vocabulary*aside__;Iw!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdosEmHCWn$>).

-->





7) <!--[rfced] We note that "KM_KL_ALG" is not is not present in the

Lightweight CMP Profile or Section 7. Please review and let us know if/how

this this citation should be updated.



Original:

   The key transport algorithm is also referred to as PROT_ENC_ALG in

   RFC 4210 Appendix D and E [RFC4210] and as KM_KL_ALG in the

   Lightweight CMP Profile [I-D.ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile], as

   well as in Section 7.

-->





8) <!--[rfced] We note that "PROT_ENC_ALG" is defined in Section 7.1, not

Section 7.2. "KM_KA_ALG", "KM_KT_ALG", and "KM_KD_ALG" are defined in

Section 7.2, not Section 7.1. "SYM_PENC_ALG" is defined in Section 7.1, not

Section 7.2. "KM_KW_ALG" and "PROT_SYM_ALG" are defined in Section 7.2, not

Section 7.2. May we update these citations accordingly?



Original:

      -  Protection of centrally generated keys: The strength of the

         algorithms used for the key management technique (Section 7.2:

         PROT_ENC_ALG or Section 7.1: KM_KA_ALG, KM_KT_ALG, KM_KD_ALG)

         and the encryption of the content-encryption key and private

         key (Section 7.2: SYM_PENC_ALG, PROT_SYM_ALG or Section 7.1:

         KM_KW_ALG, PROT_SYM_ALG).

-->





9) <!-- [rfced] It appears as though you tried to avoid citation tags being

read as part of the text.  This has been altered in some places to include

links and avoid too much redundancy.  Please review and let us know if you

have any objections.



For example:



Original:

   Specific conventions to be considered are specified in RFC 5754

   Section 2 [RFC5754].



Current:

   Specific conventions to be considered are specified in Section 2 of

   [RFC5754].

-->





10) <!-- [rfced] "With submitting" is unclear here.  Perhaps "for authoring" or "for editing" is meant?



Original:

   Thanks to Russ Housley for supporting this draft with submitting

   [RFC9044] and [RFC9045].

-->





11) <!--[rfced] The hyphenation of SHA is inconsistent in this document.

Please review and let us know if/how these instances may be made

consistent.



SHA-224 vs. SHA224

SHA-256 vs. SHA256

SHA-384 vs. SHA384

SHA-512 vs. SHA512

-->





12) <!-- [rfced] FYI - We have added expansions for abbreviations upon

first use per Section 3.6 of RFC 7322 ("RFC Style Guide"). Please review

each expansion in the document carefully to ensure correctness.

-->





13) <!-- [rfced] Please review the "Inclusive Language" portion of the

online Style Guide <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/*inclusive_language__;Iw!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdooPqpENE$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/styleguide/part2/*inclusive_language__;Iw!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdooPqpENE$>>

and let us know if any changes are needed.



Note that our script did not flag any words in particular, but this should

still be reviewed as a best practice.

-->





Thank you.



RFC Editor







On Sep 18, 2023, at 11:01 PM, [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:



*****IMPORTANT*****



Updated 2023/09/18



RFC Author(s):

--------------



Instructions for Completing AUTH48



Your document has now entered AUTH48.  Once it has been reviewed and

approved by you and all coauthors, it will be published as an RFC.

If an author is no longer available, there are several remedies

available as listed in the FAQ (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/faq/__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdomoLbptT$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/faq/__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdomoLbptT$>).



You and you coauthors are responsible for engaging other parties

(e.g., Contributors or Working Group) as necessary before providing

your approval.



Planning your review

---------------------



Please review the following aspects of your document:



*  RFC Editor questions



   Please review and resolve any questions raised by the RFC Editor

   that have been included in the XML file as comments marked as

   follows:



   <!-- [rfced] ... -->



   These questions will also be sent in a subsequent email.



*  Changes submitted by coauthors



   Please ensure that you review any changes submitted by your

   coauthors.  We assume that if you do not speak up that you

   agree to changes submitted by your coauthors.



*  Content



   Please review the full content of the document, as this cannot

   change once the RFC is published.  Please pay particular attention to:

   - IANA considerations updates (if applicable)

   - contact information

   - references



*  Copyright notices and legends



   Please review the copyright notice and legends as defined in

   RFC 5378 and the Trust Legal Provisions

   (TLP – https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdote7kIsH$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/trustee.ietf.org/license-info/__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdote7kIsH$>).



*  Semantic markup



   Please review the markup in the XML file to ensure that elements of

   content are correctly tagged.  For example, ensure that <sourcecode>

   and <artwork> are set correctly.  See details at

   <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdopqw80La$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/authors.ietf.org/rfcxml-vocabulary__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdopqw80La$>>.



*  Formatted output



   Please review the PDF, HTML, and TXT files to ensure that the

   formatted output, as generated from the markup in the XML file, is

   reasonable.  Please note that the TXT will have formatting

   limitations compared to the PDF and HTML.





Submitting changes

------------------



To submit changes, please reply to this email using ‘REPLY ALL’ as all

the parties CCed on this message need to see your changes. The parties

include:



   *  your coauthors



   *  [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> (the RPC team)



   *  other document participants, depending on the stream (e.g.,

      IETF Stream participants are your working group chairs, the

      responsible ADs, and the document shepherd).



   *  [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>, which is a new archival mailing list

      to preserve AUTH48 conversations; it is not an active discussion

      list:



     *  More info:

        https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdot0LAEg0$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/yb6lpIGh-4Q9l2USxIAe6P8O4Zc__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdot0LAEg0$>



     *  The archive itself:

        https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdokxfp9tV$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/auth48archive/__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdokxfp9tV$>



     *  Note: If only absolutely necessary, you may temporarily opt out

        of the archiving of messages (e.g., to discuss a sensitive matter).

        If needed, please add a note at the top of the message that you

        have dropped the address. When the discussion is concluded,

        [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> will be re-added to the CC list and

        its addition will be noted at the top of the message.



You may submit your changes in one of two ways:



An update to the provided XML file

 — OR —

An explicit list of changes in this format



Section # (or indicate Global)



OLD:

old text



NEW:

new text



You do not need to reply with both an updated XML file and an explicit

list of changes, as either form is sufficient.



We will ask a stream manager to review and approve any changes that seem

beyond editorial in nature, e.g., addition of new text, deletion of text,

and technical changes.  Information about stream managers can be found in

the FAQ.  Editorial changes do not require approval from a stream manager.





Approving for publication

--------------------------



To approve your RFC for publication, please reply to this email stating

that you approve this RFC for publication.  Please use ‘REPLY ALL’,

as all the parties CCed on this message need to see your approval.





Files

-----



The files are available here:

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.xml__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdouLKIf_u$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.xml__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdouLKIf_u$>

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdovQ-I1jn$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdovQ-I1jn$>

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.pdf__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdonlM9NEY$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.pdf__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdonlM9NEY$>

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.txt__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdotCr9f09$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.txt__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdotCr9f09$>



Diff file of the text:

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481-diff.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdoovrAGe6$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481-diff.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdoovrAGe6$>

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481-rfcdiff.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdouCPXw6k$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481-rfcdiff.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdouCPXw6k$> (side by side)



Diff of the XML:

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481-xmldiff1.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdok_JoZM_$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481-xmldiff1.html__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdok_JoZM_$>



The following files are provided to facilitate creation of your own

diff files of the XML.



Initial XMLv3 created using XMLv2 as input:

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.original.v2v3.xml__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdogw_PEhs$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.original.v2v3.xml__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdogw_PEhs$>



XMLv3 file that is a best effort to capture v3-related format updates

only:

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.form.xml__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdojGa6MLz$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9481.form.xml__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdojGa6MLz$>





Tracking progress

-----------------



The details of the AUTH48 status of your document are here:

   https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9481__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdonk6PyX3$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9481__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZhSv8tcSblpo6M2EqIK6gbXe2su73bypLc5SDx4gLBiKNLtlf5TuXn1nKlfqOjBydRJFeBLkuiqCoYsMmDMdonk6PyX3$>



Please let us know if you have any questions.



Thank you for your cooperation,



RFC Editor



--------------------------------------

RFC9481 (draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-algorithms-15)



Title            : Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) Algorithms

Author(s)        : H. Brockhaus, H. Aschauer, M. Ounsworth, J. Gray

WG Chair(s)      : Russ Housley, Tim Hollebeek

Area Director(s) : Roman Danyliw, Paul Wouters





Any email and files/attachments transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If this message has been sent to you in error, you must not copy, distribute or disclose of the information it contains. Please notify Entrust immediately and delete the message from your system.