IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [kitten] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-krb-spake-preauth-11: (with COMMENT)

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Mon, 22 January 2024 14:05 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@lear.ch>
X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00B29C14CEED; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 06:05:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=lear.ch
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 mU43aKkl-mWf; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 06:05:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (upstairs.ofcourseimright.com [IPv6:2a00:bd80:aa::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AD95C14F70F; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 06:05:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lear.ch; s=upstairs; t=1705932320; bh=ZfiJ1hL/gIb8ke3BE5bAE8CH7yEUEjrILveIhJDdEq4=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=U6mOjNnii6Vl0b8s7puJ7fiAX3Wku4lhjnBIvhdCpVs5sQCe+zTOtUhnwNQHT5In/ 6H7l+nzXZzAtbOV201xW1WKsqY55JIFL0dDK02ytE6+DAPdBOc43YRW0iULpN1czOt NfvS+m6us7sT34ZegmkPsFVj5LobrLPocC+vJHG4=
Received: from [192.168.0.99] (77-58-144-232.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.58.144.232]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-22ubuntu3) with ESMTPSA id 40ME5HCL523408 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Jan 2024 15:05:19 +0100
Message-ID: <3dfc6ae8-5363-4101-bb2e-85bbbf9cbf4c@lear.ch>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 15:05:13 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
To: Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org, kitten-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-kitten-krb-spake-preauth@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <170559100930.21281.8142882686300667918@ietfa.amsl.com> <d5d9e798-c6c1-4f15-a1f2-4e08580a70c4@mit.edu> <CAL0qLwZUOepsqoGY+kb5tB8CBc=EOYAtoSXk35XAMD4LF5Hw8w@mail.gmail.com> <00445cfa-b492-4179-8835-20f0339a41cd@mit.edu>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
Autocrypt: addr=lear@lear.ch; keydata= xsBNBFMe1UQBCADdYOS5APDpIpF2ohAxB+nxg1GpAYr8iKwGIb86Wp9NkK5+QwbW9H035clT lpVLciExtN8E3MCTPOIm7aITPlruixAVwlBY3g7U9eRppSw9O2H/7bie2GOnYxqmsw4v1yNZ 9NcMLlD8raY0UcQ5r698c8JD4xUTLqybZXaK2sPeJkxzT+IwupRSQ+vXEvFFGhERQ88zo5Ca Sa1Gw/Rv54oH0Dq2XYkO41rhxQ60BKZLZuQK1d9+1y3I+An3AJeD3AA31fJZD3H8YRKOBgqe ILPILbw1mM7gCtCjfvFCt6AFCwEsjITGx55ceoQ+t5B5XGYJEppMWsIFrwZsfbL+gP31ABEB AAHNGUVsaW90IExlYXIgPGxlYXJAbGVhci5jaD7CwI4EEwECADgCGwMCHgECF4AWIQSY0L2Q Rh2wkqeyYR2HtmtG2dJ6MwUCWxJwMwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQAKCRCHtmtG2dJ6M8KI B/46pFrJX+4Ockl2fHR303ais9Lyx8jv6mXKKOr8WR0UYcJ0syQrhaaZNG1VV98tYQHHK9F5 y7hH4YCsrr3odZ6zoavnx5X1X/2xw8y732f/irVoOOkYLid9IGPxa2e2nYXCZpde5/yvv3we XVE4mG4dEAD5T8iKS4Hz/3fKGJQ15o79Jv92HgC7RpCt0WaiQ0b6acP3PuwjDJzJzLFZzb7j IiB3izxQESSWE1GNRmoAK/k0gW6kmx1/87tQENrK+3Nn4CJSFQWF6entLnY7UeVm95wbMQkJ evwddDWUO2huDbmZnmxgKXGzSSpuNq7n8ICAOlbt0HfdJAZQfy25bwvezsBNBFMe1UQBCAC0 WV7Ydbv95xYGPhthTdChBIpPtl7JPCV/c6/3iEmvjpfGuFNaK4Macj9le20EA5A1BH7PgLGo HOiPM65NysRpZ96RRVX3TNfLmhGMFr5hPOGNdq+xcGHVutmwPV9U7bKeUNRiPFx3YdEkExdd qV2E8FltT0x2FSKe2xszPPHB6gVtMckX5buI9p1K3fbVhXdvEkcYY/jB0JEJGyhS5aEbct5c HUvDAkT81/YFK5Jfg8RRwu1q1t1YuIJSOWAZQ9J9oUsg6D9RpClU+tIFBoe3iTp1AUfJcypu cGKgLYKtpu/aygcpQONHYkYW5003mPsrajFhReVF5veycMbHs4u5ABEBAAHCwF8EGAECAAkF AlMe1UQCGwwACgkQh7ZrRtnSejOSuQgA27p2rYB7Kh20dym6V8c62pWpBHHTgxr/32zevxHS iXl6xvUCg5T8WUwfUk8OvgDcBErK/blDAMXQzSg3sp450JhR8RnXHXF5Zz2T04X7HnlIVJGw f2CjnwyEAJCqMzaCmI+g3Imvg/8L4nyBFvhlFHDv+kIvMiujyycjPAu7xxKplBs1/IEwmDoA MjneFmawvfeQnwdMhSKK8PjKSuzGU5uUmxj3GBfRqvTM0qpmhMPFOmDhJSmH55HLAky2Mlmq JYXJPt/9EfSEhFiua1M6gLiuNEuPkp+8jcnHQqKr0IeHt8UqcwLt2mGfIyl0FVdF9hvWPjNR zGbgqoT1Di03RQ==
In-Reply-To: <00445cfa-b492-4179-8835-20f0339a41cd@mit.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------A6qTnpE3vGrP0kIwkuw6BGAM"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/r6u_J9N3pMMhqeMk6V6qAVBKkGw>
Subject: Re: [kitten] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-kitten-krb-spake-preauth-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation <kitten.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/kitten/>
List-Post: <mailto:kitten@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 14:05:39 -0000

Hi Greg,

On 22.01.2024 14:51, Greg Hudson wrote:
>
> Speaking as a document editor: based on the positions of Nico Williams 
> and Simo Sorce, I think changing this sentence would not reflect WG 
> consensus.  I hear and understand Eliot Lear's argument that this 
> document should not endeavor to change global IANA policy regarding 
> specification-required registries, but given the precedent in RFC 
> 8447, I agree with Stephen Farrell that it would actually be a policy 
> change to prevent new registries from explicitly allowing I-D 
> specification references. 

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that it be explictly forbidden.  
Just leave that sentence out, so that the group that is looking at this 
issue can address it without this complicating our lives.

ALTERNATIVELY...

You can normatively block on the draft that will change the policy.  But 
it's a draft without rough consensus at this point and it in itself can 
change.

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email