Return-Path: X-Original-To: diem@mail2.ietf.org Delivered-To: diem@mail2.ietf.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12E79E488BAF for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:58:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1777363107; bh=ghBs/akpGS92xk4jG6ccW77tlOoy0MmBJlKzABNIn/Q=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=NWf6eIL/zzOSvnWGYVoWuwdAHpYWoPMhmFUWW0Rk3zJ4C9hDmJyakJCoM7vNpNw/Y dg8EFchuvFytadeFvyC5/7Bc7j+FhLZ+RUW22BIy9xr0HvBUKpMdk3LTq0JbFKoIja oHilkEInaC90BX9cwFLvNQrDIC17AERVS/OwWD5Y= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.206 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.206 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, MIME_HTML_ONLY_MULTI=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, MPART_ALT_DIFF=0.79, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pch.net Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tmvn4ZFQxaqe for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pch.net (keriomail.pch.net [206.220.231.84]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACF29E488A9C for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:57:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=pch.net; s=mail; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references; bh=ghBs/akpGS92xk4jG6ccW77tlOoy0MmBJlKzABNIn/Q=; b=F9QoApTCD7oym9bEj6dnR9cL1WZtTUYn6K+0tCJndnXQ5br2d1Yf0FAbOnMIPP7aFtI+mrjESz/hY 1vUVr+sIyEZFU8ObdMym5imMLuQYviVUApb//b8UYRdeEnEVxokZkUo1TebY312zxIdg7pahbdjvWU hChCUiq8Xifd3TMJCNkcZcXfwUReRfDhefqBWRlfVYsEn+xDQVPAlUilz8AJ2rfORHXHnNRbtHaqwr mziAXMod4nUyI/gdos83OrFiZD4QldaWjSwWHwza0Znvq/zlKVQ4gUCnFK2Te4Vp+/C0sGOR0EaVXb GXE7Xy/sJVTDugqX8+zMw8dtERvg9Eg== X-Footer: cGNoLm5ldA== Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2620:171:eb:a0:3ff4:81b3:effc:338c]) by mail.pch.net (Kerio Connect 9.2.7 patch 3) with ESMTPS (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits)); Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:57:40 -0700 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-2C90F33E-9CAC-4EAF-AAE0-0096EB163CF4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Bill Woodcock In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2026 15:57:28 +0800 Message-Id: <69B7B26E-3945-4CD0-8C54-27950817C3DB@pch.net> References: To: Rohan Mahy X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (23E261) Message-ID-Hash: 5WPF7VIF74PMUCAMZBZKNOPKLMK2HINM X-Message-ID-Hash: 5WPF7VIF74PMUCAMZBZKNOPKLMK2HINM X-MailFrom: woody@pch.net X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: Alex Rosenberg , Felix Linker , diem@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6 Precedence: list Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BDiem=5D_Re=3A_architectural_considerations_document?= List-Id: Discussion of digital emblems Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: --Apple-Mail-2C90F33E-9CAC-4EAF-AAE0-0096EB163CF4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok, that=E2=80=99s fine.  As long as it=E2=80=99s a question of D= NSSEC or no authentication, rather than DNSSEC, no with, or some ambiguous n= umber of other mechanisms implementers might need to bolt onto the side. &nb= sp;No need to reinvent the wheel. 
    
       &n= bsp;        -Bill


On Apr 28, 2026, at 15:37, Rohan Mahy <= ;rohan.mahy@gmail.com> wrote:

=EF=BB=BF
Bill, Alex,
We have use cases where authentication is not required. Hopefully it is s= ufficient to say that when emblems are looked up in the DNS and authenticati= on is required, that DNSsec is the default/assumed authentication mechanism;= DNSsec could also be used for other discovery mechanisms either in whole or= in part.

Thanks,
-rohan

On Tue, 28 Apr 2026, 08:38 B= ill Woodcock, <woody@pch.net> wro= te:
We do require D= NSSEC, because it provides the digital signature which allows the validator t= o assure themselves of the validity of the record bundle. 
 &= nbsp;  
               &nbs= p;-Bill


On Apr 28, 2026, at 12:31, Alex Rosenberg <alexr@veridigo.com>= wrote:

=EF=BB=BF
(inline)

On Mar 2= 2, 2026, at 1:16=E2=80=AFAM, Felix Linker <linkerfelix@gmail.com>= ; wrote:

Hi Alex,

Thanks f= or that doc. I think what you describe quite closely matches how our current=  prototypes work already (for reference https://github.com/a= dem-wg/adem-proto).

We don't require DNSSEC, as= it doesn't provide any additional security and because authorization (and t= hus extra validation steps) are necessary anyway.

How do we know that a DNS-provided emblem is not spoofed o= therwise? I have been assuming DNSSEC is required.

I have some questions on your draft:
=
  • In your Sec. 5, you mention a hierarchical structure, and you s= ay that this "hierarchy is effectively a Merkle tree of chains of trust." Is= it or is it just "effectively" - and what does the word "effectively" do he= re?
The Merkle tree is an emerg= ent property of the result, not intended. None of the uses for that property= that I=E2=80=99ve come up with seem worth pursing since we=E2=80=99re not m= aking git or a ledger of NFTs.

  • You also mention that "[s]igned fields are included i= n a cryptographic hash of the record." So will that hash be signed? I don't t= hink you mention that. And what's the benefit of signing the hash vs ju= st signing the record?
I would t= hink the hash is only used when part of the hierarchy refers to another embl= em for inclusion.

Alex

Cheers,
Felix

Am M= o., 16. M=C3=A4rz 2026 um 10:04 Uhr schrieb Alex Rosenberg <alexr@verid= igo.com>:
<= div>
I pushed this document up to datatracker th= e other day in hopes to facilitate conversation. I foolishly assumed that th= e email list would be notified of new documents being published. My apologie= s for not sending this notification prior to today=E2=80=99s meeting.
<= div style=3D"display:block">
It primar= ily describes the mental model I=E2=80=99ve been forming of what DIEM might l= ook like for the use cases we=E2=80=99ve already discussed.


Alex
__________________________________________= _____
Diem mailing list -- diem@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to diem-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________
Diem mailing list -- diem@ietf.= org
To unsubscribe send an email to diem-leave@ietf.org
=

_______________________________________________=
Diem mailing list -- diem@ietf.org
To unsubsc= ribe send an email to diem-leave@ietf.org
<= /div>_______________________________________________
Diem mailing list -- diem@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to diem-leave@ietf.org
_______________________________________________
Diem m= ailing list -- diem@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to= diem-leave@ietf.org
= --Apple-Mail-2C90F33E-9CAC-4EAF-AAE0-0096EB163CF4--