Re: [openpgp] rfc4880bis and draft-openpgp-iana-registry-updates-01

Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com> Sat, 01 December 2018 07:21 UTC

Return-Path: <tse@ribose.com>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89362128CF2 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 23:21:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ribose.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 gamubHxht1vA for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 23:21:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from KOR01-SL2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr1290043.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.129.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9E8E12426E for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 23:21:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ribose.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=Jlp3iAMZ+RZ2gkqfLDFYIf3u1UQfeztcJpp3i6ZTRQw=; b=ZWbmA3oRepGIg6X9nIOnNkYan40ACfs95k6LVBUh98daPc0v8e68nSSVrNzEdUOUYz0yR780+48dKN1UNdi3lbl81dSVQ1/RzoYxA72qvy5+o+r/BxcyOsm30NWdVnpxjd8Yw6ccF9PYOCUpa6IqGWkGEXA3Prbf7KVa1WBN0cs=
Received: from SL2PR01MB2955.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (10.174.127.83) by SL2PR01MB2699.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (20.177.181.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1382.22; Sat, 1 Dec 2018 07:21:44 +0000
Received: from SL2PR01MB2955.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([fe80::7d7f:f09d:4f80:aced]) by SL2PR01MB2955.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([fe80::7d7f:f09d:4f80:aced%4]) with mapi id 15.20.1382.020; Sat, 1 Dec 2018 07:21:44 +0000
From: Ronald Tse <tse@ribose.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
CC: "openpgp@ietf.org" <openpgp@ietf.org>, "Mark D. Baushke" <mdb@juniper.net>, Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
Thread-Topic: [openpgp] rfc4880bis and draft-openpgp-iana-registry-updates-01
Thread-Index: AQHUau5gREidRDRyVkybXZt3x9+Nn6VkGnkAgAAL4ACAALJSAIAALK73gACv7+OAA4v1gIAAdeUA
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2018 07:21:43 +0000
Message-ID: <348B9107-4726-4899-A980-FD3BEB2A0BA5@ribose.com>
References: <87y3aosju2.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> <B64F4A5B-1894-4B01-9DAE-3C7A19C772BF@ribose.com> <14036.1543342928@contrail-ubm16-mdb.svec1.juniper.net> <B6F2B98A-E960-4189-A579-E29916079904@ribose.com> <875zwhvef3.fsf@wheatstone.g10code.de> <sjmmuptyszn.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <20181201001941.GE87441@kduck.kaduk.org>
In-Reply-To: <20181201001941.GE87441@kduck.kaduk.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [112.120.148.19]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SL2PR01MB2699; 6:Meu5RE30NdefGRkUOj+rxKiqD76MznjBNwcVHFLFjgfZowxkk8o6GyKwW7EfWUFxq9ilolDbSWB0Y8RJ7Diy9OUTriym6Nm37vf3KbSeTFhCVMltSRKZlP3x5/hVX+3W2K5QZ5exi0AxJrEy9DUxR4YSwanq0Ggjn7nuVV7Hl6/goZaD91G8AGzI+Fotvd0MqncmEcBH6n0Hj1odby4jRfG+hXviKbF/UaCNBQy9OenDpE7BXhG9JiotxTeEsOuS8QK1JwLmzsgdGbOJdCJlwglIRsY4onPAw+fKvw/R0mGHu3+iU19EPNNFHj6WxI5oJiL/XpC+h7H8U5JmuIl/XfqVivaaUjshFgkulY0TM+HS1nRYcqmXrmBOsupbKQDaQybMw0N4Bm7xSHyuxz/SsUgUax9+H9DFQZFb8Np9Wh1y+b7Cf4xSoNyhlqAdhEfnKb74BW7UfbyWYddB4f5W5g==; 5:lyVafcRPCebgS4k8Txdz26809VuuglO6Slb2qVPd9PJAJjTIPaRckT4Odl1e4MfJDdag+FZ8pyCSNegKFFsxouOe17ey0w5GkthsKbgCdg6pDf5g92OyIJjwEbL1AZ+zN8GKLX6fuA2+pbCe008f0S26/QW2ZwDMA4jzVUTBx9U=; 7:LGXoMZz7n5Gc4pSGVRl7SA5wLwr+65wUjm7z+wJ0QldmxjxHYbvxKv+xGH4i+QYsBabO6nzL4rYQ7PUek0PWnia8bHjP761dXv/JHTcm53eO0GYmb8PumOe0Wzgbmi/YhStcb+XNUIQC8LwUGHtcfg==
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 5f2e1cea-3658-4f8a-2e42-08d6575da591
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390098)(7020095)(4652040)(7021145)(8989299)(4534185)(7022145)(4603075)(4627221)(201702281549075)(8990200)(7048125)(7024125)(7027125)(7023125)(5600074)(711020)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:SL2PR01MB2699;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: SL2PR01MB2699:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=tse@ribose.com;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <SL2PR01MB2699B255DB4546D9371B0C2ED7AC0@SL2PR01MB2699.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(3231454)(999002)(944501474)(52105112)(10201501046)(93006095)(93001095)(148016)(149066)(150057)(6041310)(20161123558120)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(2016111802025)(20161123562045)(6043046)(201708071742011)(7699051)(76991095); SRVR:SL2PR01MB2699; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SL2PR01MB2699;
x-forefront-prvs: 087396016C
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(366004)(136003)(39830400003)(346002)(396003)(376002)(199004)(189003)(26005)(86362001)(53936002)(6512007)(5660300001)(36756003)(102836004)(476003)(54896002)(6506007)(6246003)(486006)(76176011)(2906002)(33656002)(99286004)(446003)(97736004)(2616005)(6486002)(3846002)(6116002)(4326008)(6436002)(25786009)(229853002)(11346002)(14454004)(2171002)(508600001)(7736002)(256004)(6916009)(14444005)(316002)(71190400001)(83716004)(71200400001)(66066001)(186003)(68736007)(54906003)(93886005)(8676002)(82746002)(105586002)(15650500001)(106356001)(81156014)(8936002)(81166006); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SL2PR01MB2699; H:SL2PR01MB2955.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ribose.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: xYQ/FvrDxRufqPE29//Bvx9vSaPtvBbjEo2N//Uoy35+joVk72mX+FzbWW1ETohH8mie1GnYkXp1C4EBSr3LAJnovVumZjvu7wPgOEO6kYCkNxRrmfAt9JLZkYbCsQXXmBUBw7DeflO2z2xH8YEoWxw/AMCkUYyYCEEtNu1mvj7imFsHTmH10V52lahBe5Eix6cuDET9Zz15cYy9/zfjoB9NgV86J20bz2Mw8T5kc3YGyEcBf3lcpSO2Wr1+v+p1WE0/EwlrVdGU6Rh3K/9lzGsoSxnudljOg1nV8F0gU5Uao9i2+gLiTdmrWbxBdGtKjBFamaq6H+xgRJnsaKKMBxlfzbOb8SFnX7CoewkuDd4=
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_348B910747264899A980FD3BEB2A0BA5ribosecom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ribose.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 5f2e1cea-3658-4f8a-2e42-08d6575da591
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Dec 2018 07:21:43.8802 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: d98a04ff-ef98-489b-b33c-13c23a2e091a
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SL2PR01MB2699
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/VNY04E6mLlyxQvF3WoOlk3Ft3OE>
Subject: Re: [openpgp] rfc4880bis and draft-openpgp-iana-registry-updates-01
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2018 07:21:52 -0000

Hi Ben, Derek,

Derek is absolutely right, here.

I fully agree that managing two documents is more complex than handling one.

I'll note that for TLS 1.3 we did separate documents, RFCs 8446 and 8447,
since there were a *lot* of registry changes and we did want a permanent
record of them, but that split caused a lot of extra work to ensure things
were synchronized during AUTH48.

However, the OpenPGP IANA update document was created from a suggestion by the Security AD, where the TLS registry update model was the acceptable role model to follow. RFC 8447 is at 17 pages; this document is close to 30 — the OpenPGP IANA registries are numerous and changes to them many, since a lot of them have been dilapidated since the days of 2440.

If we merge this into 4880bis and remove them at publication, we’re adding 30 pages (temporarily) and then maybe removing 25 at publication. And we lose the permanent record that RFC 8447 provides for TLS. Perhaps there is an argument that the registries of OpenPGP aren't as important (!) as TLS’s for permanent record keeping, and therefore should be relegated to an Internet-Draft, but it doesn’t sound like a good reason to forgo that.

Given that the IETF process has already processed the pair of 8446/8447 successfully in a synchronized way, would it be possible that it’s even easier this time round?

Ron

_____________________________________

Ronald Tse
Ribose Inc.