Return-Path: 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 F0B33130DD7 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:10:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com 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 3Ljmch7X191H for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22c.google.com (mail-oi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9292C128D68 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id l202-v6so43031355oig.7 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:10:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipv-sx.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IbEATpJCVD3Y13CtVYNgY+tygmGy7Ilqfwjt0Ntq3po=; b=eWaAr+nc4W5eiSuesz9cyuo2ZlFBlVBHUn/RQ/1SKvZyVDx+YX/6jxWK2wRFqdbRxQ VHi6xDZru1vGsCPeI8tSXTegtHx60sPVZg8LlUxiA16ryItnkPEXLr3uIwo8qv7TLDcs 4UijQ5RjWbDehI5DM9B2tqlH+68eIRHIpuHbCFrBhHNK+3yqDD1Mi/gQif88rv+NAJBf OhoPqdJSosgxwkWWx0ssRu7I+9jIz/p0daNiL8aB6s6uwfkdww6mTuGJUcU6FJWmKdsP 1X29L5jn0qDasAuT5lyXYbccVZrgk3QeIIgaV/vk3y1yMMgBAKVo1I25cm21M1rtPStV mnzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IbEATpJCVD3Y13CtVYNgY+tygmGy7Ilqfwjt0Ntq3po=; b=Yxw/8YvtZsPYbwwnPHbnQttod95IpyCnQUau4hIOGO1pLmmskDqIzWXP6GvY16wDBD gxZsanpTud+GIFJQjYZyhiOYD5Gzh90MVRP8kF6mxPtdMufChOBveT75naGV++ta8FAN VmamfCKLM4ZUWnibo2z5y7i4avVbMHAi5mCBfOUo1JaJOSCeqAFpT9gMuoxB3OfjPXZO Ew+IMMyZc0EsucJbdebVGYrQtisQKIBSv648Im+30qNvoj35mm1zt6L2vpi85SHIIqWX U3VznBs7+yV06BQxYqJ5riELdr1RnJkOPpEYDETx3jDzE4iST8w2lJn2GJMgl3q4/cdJ 7tOA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51AShZmLKtFMDjUjzvgo/Wr0dsy48tAZa7jqtO225FS00e1G1RYv oh8mMqFp+9Lm6eY15fb21vRJvHiQQNDpUwofgsj7+euN0rA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdblivWvYs0i4UbcEkZRIiNuqtTOcWbyAK8BWhan1fUmx2chFM40QXXxNiLcFxtUSH0Fc5figLohelDWT5EFRIs= X-Received: by 2002:aca:4ed3:: with SMTP id c202-v6mr25169557oib.92.1536613831453; Mon, 10 Sep 2018 14:10:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Richard Barnes Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 17:10:20 -0400 Message-ID: To: mls@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000094c12c05758ac957" Archived-At: Subject: [MLS] PRs on authentication, removing UserAdd X-BeenThere: mls@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Messaging Layer Security List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 21:10:34 -0000 --00000000000094c12c05758ac957 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey all, I posted a couple of PRs today, one that simplifies things some (temporarily. probably) and one that implements one possible flavor of authentication: https://github.com/mlswg/mls-protocol/pull/58 https://github.com/mlswg/mls-protocol/pull/59 I would appreciate it if a couple of folks could take a look and see if these look sane. And by "sane", I mean "clear enough to be a focus for discussion at the upcoming interim". If I can get one or two =F0=9F=91=8D = from folks, I'll merge these and Benjamin's message protection PR and cut a new IETF draft this week, so that we have something more concrete to discuss in Paris. Thanks, --RIchard --00000000000094c12c05758ac957 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey all,

<= /div>
I posted a couple of PRs today, one that simplifies t= hings some (temporarily. probably) and one that implements one possible fla= vor of authentication:

https://github.com/mlswg/mls-protocol/pull/58
https://github.com/mlswg= /mls-protocol/pull/59

I would appreciate it if a couple of folks= could take a look and see if these look sane.=C2=A0 And by "sane"= ;, I mean "clear enough to be a focus for discussion at the upcoming i= nterim".=C2=A0 If I can get one or two =F0=9F=91=8D from folks, I'= ll merge these and Benjamin's message protection PR and cut a new IETF = draft this week, so that we have something more concrete to discuss in Pari= s.

Thanks,
--RIchard
--00000000000094c12c05758ac957--