Re: [Cfrg] IBE checking...

"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Mon, 17 November 2014 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601A71ACCFF for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:46:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
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 ODnZP1zhFEvK for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:46:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55CE91ACD1F for <Cfrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:46:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Philemon (173-8-216-38-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.216.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E44A38F47; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:46:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: 'Stephen Farrell' <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "'cfrg@irtf.org'" <Cfrg@irtf.org>
References: <546A1ABC.2010505@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <546A1ABC.2010505@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:45:37 -0800
Message-ID: <038101d002af$d3b1c680$7b155380$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQGTAM1Hw5fkAa0vMPkgWF9/9+MPH5zfXd8A
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/yY-UaUGOUgi_WucuY-XQgE2nfT4
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] IBE checking...
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 21:46:04 -0000

My first reaction is to wonder if the group discussed the IPR issues and why
the IPR disclosures were not propagated forward to this document.

Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cfrg [mailto:cfrg-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Farrell
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 7:57 AM
> To: cfrg@irtf.org
> Subject: [Cfrg] IBE checking...
> 
> 
> Hiya,
> 
> This IBE draft [1] is on next week's IESG telechat. Since IBE ain't my
thang
> really, I figured I'd check see if someone here wanted to give it a read
from a
> crypto POV.
> 
> There's not too much to this over and above RFC6507 [2] (I
> think:-) but this seems to be the first case of a standards track document
> making use of 6507 so there's a bit of process novelty here, even if not
much
> cryptographic novelty.
> 
> If you can review, sending comments here, or to the secdir list, or the
IETF list
> or just to Kathleen and I are all fine things to do. If you might get to
it but aren't
> sure please drop me a note.
> 
> Oh, and it's not that long: just 16 pages incl. examples:-)
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> S.
> 
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-ibs/
> [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6507
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list
> Cfrg@irtf.org
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg