Re: [dane] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-dane-openpgpkey: objection about keyring format documentation

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Mon, 02 March 2015 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 495F61A0122 for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 18:06:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 0MfRnB6Y9WJQ for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 18:06:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9ED941A0127 for <dane@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 18:06:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3kwPw309Ktz56H; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 03:06:11 +0100 (CET)
Authentication-Results: mx.nohats.ca; dkim=pass reason="1024-bit key; unprotected key" header.d=nohats.ca header.i=@nohats.ca header.b=KWjVX4XY; dkim-adsp=pass
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uMSvqSom9dSE; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 03:06:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 03:06:09 +0100 (CET)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD7C580416; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:06:08 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1425261968; bh=eaquYk777/LB7fmE8nkf6HlUbnJgl906VYCwxifwoeo=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=KWjVX4XYuTZLulBxJbUuFOPiTzsWYxyHfpGFHkL9P8xIe6OUtiNJOsksSx3RMhhZT ETilsPATpMaZ4EfZTTT6oSRctxuAsRskUiHxkMRFQdlj/aH9DETvavkr+6qZ86D8rl kIZTVLzO8IRSCW2hGJC+hV2ST8WQ8/0u1wa8C5qM=
Received: from localhost (paul@localhost) by bofh.nohats.ca (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) with ESMTP id t22267Rj000577; Sun, 1 Mar 2015 21:06:08 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: bofh.nohats.ca: paul owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2015 21:06:07 -0500
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Petr Spacek <pspacek@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <54EF3A7D.6070809@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.10.1503012052350.31123@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <CAHw9_iJPuG23Aok7V_wcAMirua_DPDLHy01tnd+DaUqEeK3NZA@mail.gmail.com> <54EF3A7D.6070809@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dane/LVaW4xYHwI5esrmDj0rGD1wHA3Q>
Cc: dane@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dane] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-dane-openpgpkey: objection about keyring format documentation
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: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 02:06:17 -0000

On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Petr Spacek wrote:

> On 20.2.2015 21:30, Warren Kumari wrote:
>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is ready for
>> publication and send comments to the list, clearly stating your view.
>
> IMHO current version *should be rejected* because further clarification to
> keyring format is needed.
>
> See previous discussion on
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dane/current/msg07227.html
>
> As I already said, I believe that -01 version does not define an interoperable
> standard.

It was suggested you would raise this on the openpgp email list. It
seems you have not done so.

The interoperable standard is defined in RFC 4880, the OpenPGP Message
Format. This document references that RFC for the keyring format. If you
think that reference is insufficient, I suggest you take this up on the
ietf openpgp email list and see about writing a 4880bis document that
further clarifies the keyring format.

It is not up to this document to rewrite or update RFC 4880.

> Current format of records can stay as is but it has to be clearly documented
> so we do not rely on current GPG implementation.

In my opinion, it is documented in RFC 4880. Whether or not that is
"clearly" is a subjective matter, and something that should be taken
to the OpenPGP list.

> 'It is beyond the scope of this standard to discuss the details of keyrings or
> other databases.' is simply not sufficient.

I believe it is.

Paul