[MLS] MLS: the WG name should include "group"

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> Sat, 24 March 2018 11:28 UTC

Return-Path: <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
X-Original-To: mls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8A6E1241F8 for <mls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 04:28:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 wzRBZ8DmFuMm for <mls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 04:28:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from che.mayfirst.org (che.mayfirst.org [162.247.75.118]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEB941201F2 for <mls@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 04:28:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fifthhorseman.net (c-66-31-31-124.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [66.31.31.124]) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DDB3DF99A for <mls@ietf.org>; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 07:28:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3900020046; Sat, 24 Mar 2018 11:27:28 +0000 (GMT)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: mls@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 07:27:24 -0400
Message-ID: <87r2o9n277.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mls/C-9GNU3spP_NI3iDoye4eS0vECY>
Subject: [MLS] MLS: the WG name should include "group"
X-BeenThere: mls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Messaging Layer Security <mls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mls>, <mailto:mls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mls>, <mailto:mls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 11:28:19 -0000

Thanks for all the work that has gone into the proposed MLS architecture
and protocol drafts already.

As we move toward working group formation, i'm a little bit concerned
that the ostensible name of the project ("message layer security")
doesn't adequately describe the most salient features.

We spent most of the time at the BoF in IETF 101 London talking about
the design of the group key agreement scheme and the strong
cryptographic properties we want it to provide -- and i suspect that
most of the work in any formed WG will center around that problem.

So it seems odd to me that the word "group" doesn't appear in the name
"MLS".

I'm no good at acronyms, but i'll just throw out two alternatives:

  MSG: Messaging Security for Groups

  MESSAGE: Message Encryption and Security Standard for Asynchronous Group Environments

I hope since the WG isn't yet formed, it's not too late to consider a
change to the name.  We ought to be up front about the group-specific
context that we're talking about here, as we already have a security
layer that works for messages passing between two endpoints
synchronously (TLS) and it'd be nice to clearly carve up the territory.

        --dkg