Re: Revised Last Call: 'SSH Transport Layer Encryption Modes' to Proposed

Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> Thu, 25 August 2005 05:49 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E8Ac5-0005BJ-G4; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 01:49:21 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1E8Ac3-0005Av-OU for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 01:49:19 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA17015 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 01:49:19 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from netcore.fi ([193.94.160.1]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E8AcT-0006xN-GC for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 01:49:49 -0400
Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j7P5mXr09500; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:48:33 +0300
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:48:33 +0300
From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@sun.com>
In-Reply-To: <1124926181.7308.352.camel@thunk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0508250842100.9173@netcore.fi>
References: <E1E82S5-0007mc-Nz@newodin.ietf.org> <tsl4q9fxc2j.fsf@cz.mit.edu> <89A56619A0215C06FA89B052@[192.168.0.70]> <1124926181.7308.352.camel@thunk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Revised Last Call: 'SSH Transport Layer Encryption Modes' to Proposed
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> In particular, there is a long-established tradition of specifying
> cryptographic algorithms as "Informational" documents, and referring to
> them from standards-track documents.

I think there needs to be separation of two different kinds of 
documents,

  1) informational, because the normative specification is elsewhere 
(usually another standards organization) and we could reference the 
normative spec directly, and just provide informative reference to the 
Info spec).

  2) informational document just because, well, the authors thought it 
would be easiest to write an informational document.  This is the 
normative specification, and it may or may not have had sufficient 
IETF or security review.

At least to me, these two categories should be treated differently. 
It is not clear which case this one belongs.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf