Re: [dane] [saag] Need better opportunistic terminology

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Wed, 12 March 2014 11:37 UTC

Return-Path: <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
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 852451A094C; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 04:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] 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 2AvFBCeNYdfp; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 04:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppsw-40.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-40-v6.csi.cam.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:212:8::e:f40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C67901A0969; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 04:37:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.51]:58719) by ppsw-40.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.156]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1WNhTJ-00089N-kE (Exim 4.82_3-c0e5623) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:37:17 +0000
Received: from fanf2 by hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local id 1WNhTJ-0008Q1-8H (Exim 4.72) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:37:17 +0000
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:37:17 +0000
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk
To: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140307004432.GH21390@mournblade.imrryr.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1403121121320.18502@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <CAMm+LwjF9To+w3K4RR=72BbLNE2hJa9CibWOEARYmODiuFNu9g@mail.gmail.com> <20140307004432.GH21390@mournblade.imrryr.org>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LSU 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: Tony Finch <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dane/cc2_yDD2PKht-3WanuwEy1Lt9ZA
Cc: saag@ietf.org, dane@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dane] [saag] Need better opportunistic terminology
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: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:37:28 -0000

I am inclined to avoid the word "opportunistic". Judging by the confusion
over the meaning of the word, and the several possible meanings that
people gave at the meeting last week, I don't think its jargon usage is
precise enough to be helpful. And its dictionary meaning has some slightly
unpleasant overtones.

How about the straightforwardly descriptive terms "unauthenticated
STARTTLS" and "DANE STARTTLS"?

STARTTLS implies this is an upgrade from cleartext, which I think you said
last week was one of the concepts you wanted to capture in the phrase. And
unauthenticated vs DANE should suggest the key security difference.

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
German Bight: Variable 3 or 4. Smooth or slight. Fair. Good, occasionally poor
later in south.