Re: [dane] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dane-smime-03.txt

Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org> Thu, 06 February 2014 19:53 UTC

Return-Path: <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org>
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 677AF1A03F9 for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 11:53:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 Lv9_KIXZyItD for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 11:53:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mournblade.imrryr.org (mournblade.imrryr.org [38.117.134.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C00471A03ED for <dane@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 11:53:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mournblade.imrryr.org (Postfix, from userid 1034) id D253F2AB23D; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 19:53:22 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 19:53:22 +0000
From: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org>
To: "'dane@ietf.org'" <dane@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20140206195322.GD278@mournblade.imrryr.org>
References: <41938fd202ba460285b59132c29ac826@BY2PR09MB029.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <41938fd202ba460285b59132c29ac826@BY2PR09MB029.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [dane] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dane-smime-03.txt
X-BeenThere: dane@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dane@ietf.org
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: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 19:53:27 -0000

On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 05:28:51PM +0000, Larsen, Todd wrote:

> >This is problematic because I expect that SMIMEA like TLSA generally yields 
> >an RRset, not a single record. What would be the semantics of an RRset with 
> >two RRs one with CU=4 and another with CU=2?
> 
> CU=4 trumps CU=2. Other records present with CU=4 would clearly 
> indicate a misconfiguration, but must be accounted.
> 
> This complicates validation logic. It means checking for CU=4 in entire RRSET 
> instead of declaring valid on first match.
>
> selector, matching type and associated data have no meaning for
> CU=4. The fields are present solely to maintain consistency with
> the SMIMEA format

This is IMHO an unreasonable distortion of the SMIMEA semantics.

Switching gears, was any consensus reached on the endoing of the
query label?  A truncated HMAC seems to offer better usability than
base32.  I think that the specification is in good shape, modulo
the query label encoding.  

--
	Viktor.