Re: [Isms] Last Call: rfc5953 (Transport Layer Security (TLS) Transport Model for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)) to Draft Standard

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 04:54:23PM +0200, Sean Turner wrote:
> On 5/1/11 12:41 AM, SM wrote:
> >At 14:14 19-04-2011, The IESG wrote:
> >>The IESG has received a request from the isms WG (isms) to consider the
> >>following document:
> >>
> >>- 'Transport Layer Security (TLS) Transport Model for the Simple Network
> >>Management Protocol (SNMP) '
> >>RFC 5953 as a Draft Standard
> >>
> >>The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> >>final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> >>[e-mail] mailing lists by 2011-05-03. Exceptionally,
> >>comments may be sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please
> >>retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> >>
> >>This specification contains eight normative references to standards
> >>track documents of lower maturity: RFCs 1033, 3490, 3584, 4347, 4366,
> >>5246, 5280, and 5952.
> >
> >In Section 7:
> >
> >"A hostname is always in US-ASCII (as per [RFC1033]);
> >internationalized hostnames are encoded in US-ASCII as domain
> >names after transformation via the ToASCII operation specified
> >in [RFC3490]."
> >
> >As a quick comment, RFC 1033 is a down-ref. A better reference is RFC
> >1123. As it is part of STD 3, a down-ref is no longer needed. The
> >reference to RFC 3490 could be updated to RFC 5890. That also avoids a
> >down-ref in a Draft Standard to a document that has an Obsolete status.
> 
> As SM noted, the reference to RFC 3490 needs to be updated.  In
> fact, I know the Apps ADs will place a DISCUSS on this particular
> point based on some exchanges about a DKIM draft on a similar topic.
> The change is slightly more complicated than replacing the
> references because ToASCII went bye-bye in RFC 5890.  After some
> exchanges with an Apps AD, the following change would "work" (this
> very similar to the changes proposed by DKIM to their draft) - and
> "work" means won't force a recycle at DS:
> 
> OLD:
> 
>   A hostname is always in US-ASCII (as per [RFC1033]);
>   internationalized hostnames are encoded in US-ASCII as domain
>   names after transformation via the ToASCII operation specified
>   in [RFC3490].  The ToASCII operation MUST be performed with the
>   UseSTD3ASCIIRules flag set.  The hostname is followed by a
>   colon ':' (US-ASCII character 0x3A) and a decimal port number
>   in US-ASCII.  The name SHOULD be fully qualified whenever
>   possible.
> 
> NEW:
> 
>   A hostname is always in US-ASCII (as per [RFC1033]);
>   internationalized hostnames are encoded as A-labels as specified
>   in [RFC5890].  The hostname is followed by a
>   colon ':' (US-ASCII character 0x3A) and a decimal port number
>   in US-ASCII.  The name SHOULD be fully qualified whenever
>   possible.

So you kept [RFC1033] instead of the suggested [RFC1123] by intention
or was this an accident?
 
> FYI I also asked about setting the UseSTD3ASCIIRules flag and Pete
> said it was completely unnecessary as far as he could tell.  That's
> why I just dropped it.
> 
> Does anybody object to this change?  (It's perfectly okay to object
> to these words.  We'll just need to work some other text out with
> Pete/Peter).
> 
> What do others feel about the reference change from RFC 1033 to
> 1123. Are there any technical reasons to not make this change?
> 
> As a result of the change for the 3490 reference (and maybe 1033
> references), either a new draft is needed or I need to enter an RFC
> editor note.*  I'm willing to enter these changes as RFC editor
> notes.  Just let me know which path you'd like to follow.
> 
> spt
> 
> *  The new draft or RFC editor note will need to include the
> editorial errata filed against RFC 5953.

So you are saying we have to republish RFC 5953 in order to make this
change in order to advance?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>