IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSEC] Call For Adoption: draft-camwinget-opsec-ns-impact

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Wed, 10 June 2020 12:42 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: opsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AF193A0598 for <opsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 05:42:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.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 0FyUsp_NWrsU for <opsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 05:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (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 7059F3A078A for <opsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 05:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id a9so2281760ljn.6 for <opsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 05:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QdfDirTwVNBQYHpf/GigYMEdA04IC1w/lj0ONWK20Q4=; b=Dvkerjf/IVHdD1qRaHaynt8+5VKoNz6IPDZ3fvEc1I6XfOIpSjTKy/onhw5iRODbWV nJWull8lz99WVtOo3yD1vp+FLJ6kHsanDTKHDXrcwP9i4agfuJwKnnAU2fk8vzYU0dmN jre2rXYxHzSEyMBeEzUwMJyc+pynB2X3/dLwYyUNse1Zl9smGyPX6MleJk5QtRtQG09y OUuruZII2ayDLyS8Bb0N5zSeZ+kAnRzUDGzFU+cNnaS+UxXBGAqsk6j0M0tY1H8JDwB6 47fi6I27r3lQ/Qsqf/6M4RGM1TZyyLN5Z1ekI5FZ05s+qxx9JUtj7Gjx6cszrd/g1JGr m2cg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QdfDirTwVNBQYHpf/GigYMEdA04IC1w/lj0ONWK20Q4=; b=MLvaDAJWBDzuty1BIa0ViUcmP8jl8PPeX8AE2xRm7HXUHcCPR8BFgVtdf10ToBPDn/ OP1M7Reov4XwjoaOWY+uTiZL/54qwnYs8ZFnG4v+4U1tODfZOOYOJFcgnwmAzba50SZE 9G0sCfN+JhAV3v/QgxJG38JDyySIFkMyDALJG3JW+XL8C0CRGWSBU6etnjFm/Dobg6GF JQoNVsvrQ//CDqmsQfZhxi7WSp9QkkiyrekVpe0CfrMFXpjcGkrYKMODduI82M/Y3fRJ C/TuQZxYxmkPLzXbS2B5GRvtWuEWh2EH9U41yQMICa0hoOZIR9K+pYc77lRG4tXDz332 z4DQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530p7Ki045y5grGMRwKigYtNruyMJifmoip7wYR1y5RmySStd4SN ddncxyN92aRXJWsJW/w8Ph2Z8DyQIi4PCqXby71rHg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx0o+mee0vORw8kuVC79SJRa6ZPIlfhg5NCKxHfGYYEJ7ut/meD34ld2o7/iP0EN9sNzWqsw2HhSLFqvXqVs70=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7105:: with SMTP id m5mr1559716ljc.79.1591792940395; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 05:42:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <DM6PR05MB63480144A85175AA35841326AE860@DM6PR05MB6348.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <DB7PR07MB534069F46322B83AD13C216CA2830@DB7PR07MB5340.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <DB7PR07MB534069F46322B83AD13C216CA2830@DB7PR07MB5340.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:41:44 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iJvJk16oPYEON_+G=jxUtFVHBnpZUt0RTE6aosQytHpew@mail.gmail.com>
To: tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>
Cc: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, OPSEC <opsec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsec/99EoJl_4xE9FeO1kJZ74CMedpCU>
Subject: Re: [OPSEC] Call For Adoption: draft-camwinget-opsec-ns-impact
X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: opsec wg mailing list <opsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:42:26 -0000

On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 6:18 AM tom petch <ietfa@btconnect.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: OPSEC <opsec-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
> Sent: 05 June 2020 16:04
> To: OPSEC
> Subject: [OPSEC] Call For Adoption: draft-camwinget-opsec-ns-impact
>
> Folks,
>
> This email begins a call for adoption on draft-camwinget-opsec-ns-impact<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-camwinget-opsec-ns-impact/>. The call for adoption will end on 6/19/2020.
>
> Support
>
> I would have liked this to be a TLS document but the fact that it is not makes it even more important that it is adopted.

Actually, that raises an important point -- why is it *not* a TLS
document? Are we wading into deep waters here? Did TLS object to this
document, or just show no interest, or say "'tis a fine idea, but too
operational for here, vaya con dios"?

Can this CfA be CCed to the TLS WG so that we get more review?

W

>
> Tom Petch
>
>                                         Ron and Jen
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> _______________________________________________
> OPSEC mailing list
> OPSEC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email