Re: [dane] On the PKIX-TA / PKIX-CA question? [ One week WGLC ]

Jakob Schlyter <jakob@kirei.se> Tue, 10 December 2013 07:12 UTC

Return-Path: <jakob@kirei.se>
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 915891ADBCF for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 23:12:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 skaIit8QozUW for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 23:12:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spg.kirei.se (spg.kirei.se [IPv6:2001:67c:394:15::9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA13C1AE1F5 for <dane@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 23:12:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kirei.se; s=spg20100524; h=received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=m215+2Guns+06+sYGpMesujPbmIjtsNFWU43fSibZPE=; b=cIZ2izjxbeUSjvhumvuRlfqErFEEezzS71bLU9K370VdmkqfmMVXBkvSXqgjeh4fh5ok4EqUuQQjO yzXATjZR85Mub37VvRf48wcTbwpPvChDYgLDZOC/d1sw6BamK/tq/gLG6N6uZcxBY2NEV4Tll3zjBN wLBcGQS+rSyTNw/A=
Received: from mail.kirei.se (unknown [91.206.174.10]) by spg-relay.kirei.se (Halon Mail Gateway) with ESMTPS for <dane@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:12:46 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: Jakob Schlyter <jakob@kirei.se>
In-Reply-To: <20131209231919.GY761@mournblade.imrryr.org>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:12:42 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4FAF6906-D258-4AB3-B76C-888C35566097@kirei.se>
References: <A06891E1-01E0-40CC-A9A2-171CAA39AB79@kumari.net> <20131205175314.GH761@mournblade.imrryr.org> <E78C07CA-B742-43B2-8848-33DEB22A8014@kumari.net> <201312080234.rB82YeoW029387@new.toad.com> <m3y53tg0c3.fsf@carbon.jhcloos.org> <20131209231919.GY761@mournblade.imrryr.org>
To: "dane@ietf.org list" <dane@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Subject: Re: [dane] On the PKIX-TA / PKIX-CA question? [ One week WGLC ]
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: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 07:12:55 -0000

On 10 dec 2013, at 00:19, Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org> wrote:

> [ Usages 0/1 are a blunder, we're continuing to pay the cost of
>  this blunder. ]

As the author of 6698, I don't agree and believe 0/1 are still useful as an additional layer of security for traditional PKIX. The world is not always black and white.

	jakob