IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dane] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-dane-openpgpkey - *please* review.

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Sat, 14 March 2015 10:37 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 200901ACCE4 for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 03:37:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 qG8syr_DfM3P for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 03:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com (mail-wi0-f175.google.com [209.85.212.175]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64E2A1ACCDF for <dane@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 03:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibg7 with SMTP id g7so4310005wib.1 for <dane@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 03:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yWQ+aI7XOkUYOYaMkx+eKdbFKncLP3WR7qYinNl81vI=; b=hV9OpTt6zzXpRnDHKMr96ulxEpjZWFRr4E2kec3SAJGq2y/USF3Lh1udANr5hBL+1c fm010IuEQgPDjHWEvP5kgw2vQiss6TQj2B/mZ+8ZgqF3fRF5LpbrOs3K4JDfAB4K4V5T XHwezNZtHuH2y2sBRPfkHm120iCXrMNy+DgX+B4Qmk2zNEzn8LZ/spt2K7W4o1u1DLhq acMGW26nX0FpW5VPAgm/b8jJ/wY67wBgvohJ5dSXFdn64+/GkDHwh0QP3s8wlK/OpAV6 WsCpqOf733vDU24oi9LYFcuUzZl85pJC83r+MxG3IWaTEMr2A7ts1uGHtyP6EJ2UlAg5 kn5g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmWJvdzkrdFrWtLAS81MKfwcFewxuJi/JNTy7Id1G41kaMsP4PPNrxwUM8xIwyqjkh8+nSU
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.2.43 with SMTP id 11mr105284117wjr.104.1426329443022; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 03:37:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.110.97 with HTTP; Sat, 14 Mar 2015 03:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <15467987-08AA-439A-99AB-22F813C0F841@isode.com>
References: <CAHw9_iJPuG23Aok7V_wcAMirua_DPDLHy01tnd+DaUqEeK3NZA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_iKU=inVWUJkj4oR7zc5Fh-ejJRpLfURaeF8J4AxCcz_BQ@mail.gmail.com> <5502E194.4020507@powerdns.com> <alpine.LFD.2.10.1503131404400.22027@bofh.nohats.ca> <15467987-08AA-439A-99AB-22F813C0F841@isode.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 11:37:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iLafyHnbnii2huxoR48rybydu-tT4rScm6oo9p==ytkyw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dane/9QNrYxE2QfY52VCFoCExfKrDFuc>
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, "dane@ietf.org" <dane@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dane] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-dane-openpgpkey - *please* review.
X-BeenThere: dane@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS-based Authentication of Named Entities <dane.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dane>, <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dane/>
List-Post: <mailto:dane@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane>, <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 10:37:26 -0000

Thanks everyone for your feedback and comments, the WGLC is now closed.

I think that it looks like there is strong consensus for publishing,
but I'm hoping to re-read all the comments on my flight home
(currently sitting in TXL) to see if I've missed anything obvious...

W

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Alexey Melnikov
<alexey.melnikov@isode.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 13 Mar 2015, at 18:10, Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
>
>>> Appendix A:
>>> Two things: I suggest moving this to -usage and adding pseudocode
>>> examples. The latter mostly to encourage more implementations.
>>
>> I thought about keeping it software agnostic, but in the end figured
>> since gnupg has been around for over a decade, it is kind of similar
>> to using openssl commands as example.
>
> I agree. Some real world usage is good.
>
>> But I have no problems making
>> this software agnostic if the WG thinks that is more appropriate.
>
> More examples are always better :-). (I am not suggesting you change anything, if you can't think of any).
>
> _______________________________________________
> dane mailing list
> dane@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email