IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF mail server and SSLv3

Lixia Zhang <lixia@cs.ucla.edu> Mon, 08 February 2016 08:21 UTC

Return-Path: <lixia@cs.ucla.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D17D1ACD53 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 sZxAPP85KmZc for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [131.179.128.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C2D11ACD39 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71B2F16081D; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id tyPyhX0TLN-3; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DCA1160F5C; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu
Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 99twIIt0ao2E; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.7] (cpe-76-91-246-89.socal.res.rr.com [76.91.246.89]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 315C816081D; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 00:21:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: IETF mail server and SSLv3
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
From: Lixia Zhang <lixia@cs.ucla.edu>
X-Priority: 3
In-Reply-To: <FD83B269-D641-4207-B4EE-922747449B2E@piuha.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:21:13 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4EF78885-B743-4134-A30E-AC7F38D5D6D1@cs.ucla.edu>
References: <F38A9FEF-7DBB-4F40-860E-6CB425E5EEE3@ietf.org> <000a01d1585b$60b68e60$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <FD83B269-D641-4207-B4EE-922747449B2E@piuha.net>
To: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KULpCVn4V1EL63bLVPXaMqJ2bBo>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 08:21:17 -0000

> On Jan 26, 2016, at 1:16 PM, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> wrote:
> 
> Tom, Phillip,
> 
> Impressive? Not much. If anything, I feel a bit
> embarrassed that we are updating our servers
> only now :-)
> 
> This really was just an IETF service announcement.
> The tools team felt that if we are making changes
> we should announce them rather than surprise
> anybody. We plan to announce similar other things
> as well, when there are changes. And I certainly
> believe this particular change was a technically
> reasonable thing to do.
> 
> We do of course have other things to discuss —
> how much the IETF is doing for improving email
> security in the Internet, and what can be done to
> it to begin with. But that is a broader topic that
> IMO, doesn’t have much to do with what specific
> arrangements we have for our own e-mail
> server (and at a particular layer of that server,
> even).  Phillip’s questions are very rasonable
> in that broader topic, however.

and supposedly that's on the table now?
would be good to hear what's the plan here.

Lixia

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email