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

Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org> Thu, 06 February 2014 16:14 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 0A08B1A03DC for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 08:14:27 -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 0jZKGiqkLglE for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 08:14:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mournblade.imrryr.org (mournblade.imrryr.org [38.117.134.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15CA01A03DB for <dane@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 08:14:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mournblade.imrryr.org (Postfix, from userid 1034) id 5BCB62AB23D; Thu, 6 Feb 2014 16:14:22 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 16:14:22 +0000
From: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org>
To: dane@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20140206161422.GZ278@mournblade.imrryr.org>
References: <eacbef1471794e78902f8470cf262b51@BY2PR09MB029.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <eacbef1471794e78902f8470cf262b51@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 16:14:27 -0000

On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 03:36:57PM +0000, Larsen, Todd wrote:

> Agreeing with Eric's point to ensure the UC 4 discussion doesn't
> focus on certificate revocation.
> 
> Use case 4 for SMIMEA does not revoke a certificate. Rather, the
> domain revokes an S/MIME user. In contrast to any evidence the user
> has to claim association, the domain is positively stating that
> user X is not valid for SMIME applications. I consider that
> substantially different from the absence of a DANE record (or
> addition of a bogus record to force validation failure).

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?

It still seems simplest to list no RRs for a user to indicate that
there are no keys for that user.

If CU=4 is supposed to disavow all keys for a user, what is the
meaning of the selector, matching type and associated data, ...

-- 
	Viktor.