Re: [http-auth] [IANA #931553] Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpauth-mutual-10.txt> (Mutual Authentication Protocol for HTTP) to Experimental RFC

Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 28 October 2016 01:34 UTC

Return-Path: <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: http-auth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: http-auth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CF912999E; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:34:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 IKpDAlUJm_37; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x234.google.com (mail-vk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C84D129476; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x234.google.com with SMTP id q126so43485939vkd.2; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=AMVScwUt6wZzoDEoX3DsCvONefXl2FqMNu/WPEQ4a9I=; b=xeiX9zQYTWp37MjxXLKA3axJAxR7WVrPGyO9wulMdZF9RucqulFT0NgaaN4YCZUqlq 3h3T8SD7zn837X8CK+IiBba8T6+QnaNsFG1tY6uxIU9JGsaP9ZTaW9s0PhCG4W6glZr1 ckXM4VLje2441CJXQJg94EAsTVotVL69PJf0lTvG5JZA9eBgiP1KQtphtAtgubzMRqWo kNgZ9btNin4EgyX5ysCfkkkHe11hcUfFXF8MS8KVjinI0HshbOjsj7k3/hU0UFa2yPN/ pCk21DiOkV4uCXk6KX89RfDBThc5PaTkwfWytCYY1ZwIHKiTxHcodXQgOXtIVhUXGfDB Z//g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=AMVScwUt6wZzoDEoX3DsCvONefXl2FqMNu/WPEQ4a9I=; b=mUujAOQ72qwuaz2UhPzU9Fbw9avU7nLPo0Xo/EJjin4NCy4LgZ2wLO30SZdykUckJJ toFzjsR2YhDIalK7oRAyO5K5+bifEpiZhT8f9u1iKntzdy5344InsfwQBCiWSlonKPJm 5myPmQy9jz2v1BmG0Ciso8cLkEFmELYPfwZaSxiHqQBW3Yr+A19B8tpP/hQGUBZcS5NK 8kv9mECO2t21/dhp74vJ1Jn5NUKPmYagkrs7N3R/Im20ffktqRQ5NKiEpAFSdCp3ueLT ZVm7Tyu3GCzmIu1ze0RyR+VSpM12TsPQGDcxpFGeA084KLazbaswMasu1xXWE2EHBvpG gpVg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfVZ6ErwpT0xaJvl3PTYrFQUwHRXxPzwrCLMFJ18U3oiWpvp6SWZnufzWLcCZWF3yyMh9VssvWKPtShAQ==
X-Received: by 10.31.183.134 with SMTP id h128mr10288151vkf.124.1477618462257; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:34:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.176.82.143 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 18:34:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <rt-4.2.9-18754-1477420405-1826.931553-9-0@icann.org>
References: <RT-Ticket-931553@icann.org> <147621063154.31943.11848350290741726768.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <rt-4.2.9-18754-1477420405-1826.931553-9-0@icann.org>
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 21:34:21 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHbuEH7=So1t6bEAgNb2KbhOeDmyfXyerJN1S6iZ8YQsSkXmog@mail.gmail.com>
To: drafts-lastcall-comment@iana.org, "http-auth@ietf.org" <http-auth@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113bee228e7d57053fe2dbb2
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/http-auth/JWlqQviaQuT5mfl9Hau46hldflw>
Cc: draft-ietf-httpauth-mutual.all@ietf.org, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [http-auth] [IANA #931553] Last Call: <draft-ietf-httpauth-mutual-10.txt> (Mutual Authentication Protocol for HTTP) to Experimental RFC
X-BeenThere: http-auth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: HTTP authentication methods <http-auth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/http-auth>, <mailto:http-auth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/http-auth/>
List-Post: <mailto:http-auth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:http-auth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-auth>, <mailto:http-auth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 01:34:29 -0000

Forwarding to the httpauth working group.  I haven't seen a response on the
IANA review yet.

Thanks,
Kathleen

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Sabrina Tanamal via RT <
drafts-lastcall-comment@iana.org> wrote:

> (BEGIN IANA COMMENTS)
>
> IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:
>
> The IANA Services Operator has completed its review of
> draft-ietf-httpauth-mutual-10.txt. If any part of this review is
> inaccurate, please let us know.
>
> We have a question about one of the actions requested in the IANA
> Considerations section of this document.
>
> Upon approval of this document, we understand that there are two registry
> actions to complete.
>
> First, a new registry is to be created called the HTTP Mutual
> authentication algorithms registry. We note that the registrations in this
> new registry will consist of a Token, a Description and a Reference.
>
> QUESTION -> Where should this new registry be located? Is it a new
> registry on the List of all IANA maintained protocol parameter registries
> or is it a subregistry of an existing registry? If it is a subregistry of
> an existing registry, in which registry will it be contained?
>
> We understand that the registry is to be managed through Expert Review as
> defined in RFC 5226.
>
> While this document provides no initial values for the new registry, we
> understand that another document ietf-httpauth-mutual-algo is dependent
> upon the actions in this IANA Considerations section being completed. When
> they are, the document ietf-httpauth-mutual-algo will provide new
> registrations for the new registry.
>
> Second, another new registry is to be created called the HTTP Mutual
> authentication host validation methods registry. We note that the
> registrations in this new registry will consist of a Token, a Description
> and a Reference.
>
> QUESTION -> Where should this new registry be located? Is it a new
> registry on the List of all IANA maintained protocol parameter registries
> or is it a subregistry of an existing registry? If it is a subregistry of
> an existing registry, in which registry will it be contained?
>
> We understand that the registry is to be managed through Expert Review as
> defined in RFC 5226.
>
> There are initial registrations in this new registry as follows:
>
> +----------------------+----------------------------+-------
> ---------------------+
> | Token | Description | Reference |
> +----------------------+----------------------------+-------
> ---------------------+
> | host | Host name verification | [ RFC-to-be Section 7 ] |
> | | only | |
> | tls-server-end-point | TLS certificate-based | [ RFC-to-be Section 7 ] |
> | tls-unique | TLS unique key-based | [ RFC-to-be Section 7 ] |
> +----------------------+----------------------------+-------
> ---------------------+
>
> We understand that these are the only actions required to be completed
> upon approval of this document.
>
> Note:  The actions requested in this document will not be completed until
> the document has been approved for publication as an RFC. This message is
> only to confirm what actions will be performed.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Sabrina Tanamal
> IANA Services Specialist
> PTI
>
> (END IANA COMMENTS)
>
>


-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen