Re: [dns-privacy] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dprive-dtls-and-tls-profile

"Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Fri, 07 October 2016 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E7E12963A for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 07:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
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 autolearn_force=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 M-nwwcbD9ZdZ for <dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 07:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0BE5129636 for <dns-privacy@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 07:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.32.60.131] (50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.proper.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id u97EimYw029790 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Oct 2016 07:44:49 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail.proper.com: Host 50-1-99-230.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [50.1.99.230] claimed to be [10.32.60.131]
From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 07:44:47 -0700
Message-ID: <8B3443E9-56D2-4FB4-9C89-98FB9893E286@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20161007094840.GA27400@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
References: <5dc29c0c-9f34-dcac-8d94-f2722ee6a4ba@gmail.com> <20161007094840.GA27400@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.5r5263)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/tPcPEeHONlI9qO56KLziIrXeHXI>
Cc: "dns-privacy@ietf.org" <dns-privacy@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] Working Group Last Call draft-ietf-dprive-dtls-and-tls-profile
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dns-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dns-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:dns-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 14:44:55 -0000

On 7 Oct 2016, at 2:48, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:

> The document seems to use "X.509" and "PKIX" as synonyms. Is it really
> the case?

No. PKIX is an extension of X.509 (but almost no one uses unextended 
X.509 certs). Changing them all to PKIX is probably best.

--Paul Hoffman