Re: [C430] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9001 <draft-ietf-quic-tls-34.txt> NOW AVAILABLE

"Martin Thomson" <mt@lowentropy.net> Mon, 03 May 2021 23:04 UTC

Return-Path: <mt@lowentropy.net>
X-Original-To: c430@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: c430@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61807F407DC; Mon, 3 May 2021 16:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=0.01, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, SUBJECT_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: rfcpa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=Bp8IBQpl; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Ugd7BvSk
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X6_vEG9CraG6; Mon, 3 May 2021 16:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86D41F40789; Mon, 3 May 2021 16:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 958825C00C4; Mon, 3 May 2021 19:04:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap10 ([10.202.2.60]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 03 May 2021 19:04:53 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm2; bh=aH 8zjqBk1oVTb7ezquYYvjqDMTRYA8Mt0KY9fd78xbA=; b=Bp8IBQplTj9OxcPnMi Rj6gRgEz08xyRzOFchr/J7UhETpUKbLiU5Lj6Usm0PDAv8GYNtfyIvWV06ij9iA0 Z0yK2rmgHAq+gSqBMIHZDiTIQjgl1GhHwyY7eEDx52Yc+WJvbP7dRVnOtqXBPiia Emi0d5hiq1dfB53j5OPR2k3hE43Nkx5Vdia4kxZe20KeH63zAwS6A9vHHa/kD4v9 zNtc+NDpaSuw2OjlsMHyOmkuuKD/rgON0v/1+6KOOj9w1FamIqJRas2IeUeRBkls PQ4NNdagItqyQNCLIPr5i0gUHgsZ5Wt1ux8A+KtT4iUJssbB0m6oMaCFtAhWg+fm JcfQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=aH8zjqBk1oVTb7ezquYYvjqDMTRYA8Mt0KY9fd78x bA=; b=Ugd7BvSkaEMHeyQBdp3odqEJiwGktfNoIsomIMokf7cvk2hAXSbgLbD0C nLAVls2DiyxYzh+IG5ayZgQ9ZlHaeAjvkKX+1040d21YnGUzu9g8TY/lfA7spHAP 0SN3CwRw4tB5nEoNSe8hwzR//MuK+dUOKBYvdc7VjKb+goDSMofwjHCm1z3BrU+U Zh1oFE1LAN+PyG3XvIWnfKK1TGMJLTjtqUcg17OQnTr7C/QkVObLL1CeWd3HEGob 7zpJbGCp5jLrD3BxgXa3vNAnq9Bo0nImL32ctI4qibsdnkHeR1A+lV9p3AEl6jq7 qxE6YfSLx82VMeRQZqUbBguUn1sIQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:lIGQYKECU_mzIn4gjRxptxeR3b_u4DGJXIauJ9JObkdKKF06AJAgfA> <xme:lIGQYLXgFg_FyXiHP02Rce7Qiu5B2k14MiJ430f-es0JjIcDOQy-f8m_MX6BikPi_ A5zcooHnUrS_SITajY>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrvdefhedgudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgfgsehtqhertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgr rhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpefgjeeuudeiffeltdegleehjedvtedtjeduudehgfegfefgkefg ueeiteegffdttdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehmtheslhhofigvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvght
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:lIGQYEKj3A5lwLqrfzOuld_bgNvNYvjpom9hA-3_7fHS69MeLdNlyg> <xmx:lIGQYEE7WpAEm6uAClBFL63AmxLFYdPnFxxx9mq9YjfqiKZGHCcGaQ> <xmx:lIGQYAVl18FmDJi_0il3aqjc-PICC3_p7-0jnWEzkx6N9RitmthWwA> <xmx:lYGQYDEC_qaeYiqCuCUn2O6iw_XFPrBKsCEca2MVDlPM6BCjozd7cw>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id B53044E0178; Mon, 3 May 2021 19:04:52 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-403-gbc3c488b23-fm-20210419.005-gbc3c488b
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <3a422abd-ffc2-4038-85e7-36b1471d26bf@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8C6D1371-0EF7-461B-A311-F2D762CDBE48@amsl.com>
References: <20210427074149.B07ADF40797@rfc-editor.org> <3fac22d9-bbbc-4963-92f8-2a3aa399a390@www.fastmail.com> <8C6D1371-0EF7-461B-A311-F2D762CDBE48@amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 04 May 2021 09:04:33 +1000
From: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: Sandy Ginoza <sginoza@amsl.com>
Cc: rfc-editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, Zaheduzzaman Sarker <Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com>, Martin Thomson via C430 <c430@rfc-editor.org>, Matt Joras <matt.joras@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>, Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [C430] AUTH48 [JM]: RFC 9001 <draft-ietf-quic-tls-34.txt> NOW AVAILABLE
X-BeenThere: c430@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <c430.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/c430>, <mailto:c430-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/c430/>
List-Post: <mailto:c430@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:c430-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/c430>, <mailto:c430-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 May 2021 23:04:39 -0000

Thanks Sandy,

Just a few brief responses.

On Tue, May 4, 2021, at 06:07, Sandy Ginoza wrote:
> Perhaps:
>    Thus, endpoints that do not send packets larger than 2^11 bytes
>    cannot protect more than 2^28 packets in a single connection without
>    causing an attacker to gain a more significant advantage than the
>    target of 2^-57.

I was thinking of rewriting it, but this is better than what I had in mind.  Thanks.

> In RFC 9001, I believe the type was set to pseudocode where the lead-in 
> text introduced what followed as pseudocode.  For these cases, is 
> <sourcecode type=“”> suitable (i.e., no type set)?  Or is the 
> preference to revert to <artwork>?    

I would prefer that these remain <artwork>.  I don't think that our tools can produce an empty type on <sourcecode> and the intent was always that these are illustrations rather than "code".  I've checked all artwork in the document, so what you receive should be correct.

> We will pass your suggestion along to the XML and style guide change 
> management group.

Thanks.  If there was an open process for that, I'd be even happier.