[DNSOP]Re: [Ext] Our reading of consensus on draft-hardaker-dnsop-rfc8624-bis, and the "must-not-algorithm" docs.

Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org> Tue, 14 May 2024 23:14 UTC

Return-Path: <edward.lewis@icann.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BB07C1840DD for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2024 16:14:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.197
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.197 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vy4BzELT2ikB for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2024 16:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppa4.dc.icann.org (ppa4.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.77]) (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 99D2EC1840C6 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2024 16:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MBX112-E2-VA-1.pexch112.icann.org (out.mail.icann.org [64.78.48.205]) by ppa4.dc.icann.org (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTPS id 44ENCPYY003800 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 14 May 2024 16:12:25 -0700
Received: from MBX112-E2-VA-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.217.41.128) by MBX112-E2-VA-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.217.41.128) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.34; Tue, 14 May 2024 19:14:04 -0400
Received: from MBX112-E2-VA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.217.41.128]) by MBX112-E2-VA-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.217.41.128]) with mapi id 15.02.1258.034; Tue, 14 May 2024 19:14:04 -0400
From: Edward Lewis <edward.lewis@icann.org>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Ext] [DNSOP]Our reading of consensus on draft-hardaker-dnsop-rfc8624-bis, and the "must-not-algorithm" docs.
Thread-Index: AQHapkGuVPiqamuqm0mpfQs/R0wTmrGXXE8A
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 23:14:04 +0000
Message-ID: <665744A7-6E9F-4063-B5AF-E0CAED8E2CFA@icann.org>
References: <CAHw9_iKavFk6QBU=rYXU5R7EigJZHNqyYengUpPF3KiCiCUEJQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_iKavFk6QBU=rYXU5R7EigJZHNqyYengUpPF3KiCiCUEJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.65.22091101
x-originating-ip: [192.0.47.234]
x-source-routing-agent: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_665744A76E9F4063B5AFE0CAED8E2CFAicannorg_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.650,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2024-05-14_14,2024-05-14_01,2023-05-22_02
Message-ID-Hash: V4P6IMTUAAKMVKLFSP4IV4ZZLQBE4J5K
X-Message-ID-Hash: V4P6IMTUAAKMVKLFSP4IV4ZZLQBE4J5K
X-MailFrom: edward.lewis@icann.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-dnsop.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [DNSOP]Re: [Ext] Our reading of consensus on draft-hardaker-dnsop-rfc8624-bis, and the "must-not-algorithm" docs.
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/PJm-YAB473_DG52lhwTD8UJM9YI>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:dnsop-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dnsop-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dnsop-leave@ietf.org>

>From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
>Date: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 at 16:59
>To: dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>
>Subject: [Ext] [DNSOP]Our reading of consensus on draft-hardaker-dnsop-rfc8624-bis, and the "must-not-algorithm" docs.

>Option 1: Pivot this document from providing implementers with guidance (“Implementers MUST NOT use Foo for signing”) to providing guidance to operators instead (“Operators MUST NOT use Foo for signing”).

I would tweak this question a bit, sparked by the idea the implementers’ job here is not to “use”:  For operators, it’s a use/don’t use recommendation.  For implementers, it’s a support/don’t support recommendation and a recommended ‘default’ value.