IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Dance] Updating TLSA RR registry?

Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com> Thu, 10 November 2022 10:02 UTC

Return-Path: <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: dance@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dance@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 271C8C15258D for <dance@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 02:02:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Hf89ALfrMza for <dance@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 02:02:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [23.123.122.147]) (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 39757C1522BA for <dance@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 02:02:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA5D8624D4 for <dance@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 05:01:48 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at htt-consult.com
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id ZtIhOuCPfUx0 for <dance@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 05:01:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [31.133.132.136] (dhcp-8488.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.132.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A183060944 for <dance@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Nov 2022 05:01:42 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <0fe75999-4d4f-a4a5-817d-61664070ed86@htt-consult.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 05:02:11 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.1
To: dance@ietf.org
Content-Language: en-US
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dance/BCvnkMd6-z1uq4CE-6RFDWoLJHA>
Subject: [Dance] Updating TLSA RR registry?
X-BeenThere: dance@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: DANE Authentication for Network Clients Everywhere <dance.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dance>, <mailto:dance-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dance/>
List-Post: <mailto:dance@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dance-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dance>, <mailto:dance-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 10:02:32 -0000

I have not notice, or heard any discussion here (could well have missed 
it) on the TLSA RR wrt DANCE.

Is it appropriate to add DANCE-EE type to the TLSA Certificate Usage 
subregistry or is the DANE-EE good enough?

If so should this be explicitly said in draft-ietf-dance-tls-clientid?

Should DANCE or COSE add the C509 format to the TLSA Selector subregistry?

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-cbor-encoded-cert/

I will be in DRIP when DANCE is meeting.

Bob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email