Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Sun, 17 September 2017 20:55 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: precis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CEE11331E5 for <precis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 13:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.721
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=stpeter.im header.b=VRzlyRHk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=UKax/FtL
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 KZge0ZfQpVeB for <precis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 13:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDD64133352 for <precis@ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 13:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBABA20C0B; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 16:55:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 17 Sep 2017 16:55:23 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stpeter.im; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=LDqaGJxrAeuUqyvIZUxzkSbhlTg+Lx5Pt4BgIKumG qA=; b=VRzlyRHk5lxAx1wURY1c8rLM/T1v6uG3UnNgPYma7S/RIBaYIuSZzbY3D 7LH7BfS9Cw8zCVvT6fTX70fnk+ft+IxYo14Za4qi8r3oIlBpk6Opakpfzk5kyNnK F73Kel8BbBFaAJDrmDuT3vtq8teQv8Tl1yPSrG8BcvcTtsY1kvdQOFbRfGzgHQWJ j2jKFogNpFcrVlD9jCMjCfJ+AZpvsMadTckTbQUiaBDgCZ1qHFjzCbV6k2y/46Ly ZNUCu+XeL9A/NVQvVlY5lilD9iHlAJeI3F3gEaLHTeju/2OO8tAZ32+Di3PbYy8+ +bDtTG0PKsf26oUNGglLI40E69cbA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=LDqaGJxrAeuUqyvIZU xzkSbhlTg+Lx5Pt4BgIKumGqA=; b=UKax/FtLH7FFhGaE82Vrc6LKwB0jROe7nn S776QxPSx9CBGlMIrryQTvEFfFnUZnhBh60KZ7yHoTk7iYrsAAU3gCaE28fm1xf5 jTtm1AnPcNJFw5XzNf0zw5ZOywRr88inxxqa+Kf06FTxiKUKcaljFClT6DXNL8xB n3Yj3CsGjha8DFicAvJswTeu8QpUYxhOIXm4BDyFIuk1FR8ICE4SojOG0lpZfBC3 NJ0ayKdqBWbxWC3EyvQP+07NIJWlOpUbBBxL3xvIG8N0TCDoNV8pe2SoeC7zh8GE Cmo2vjWR9LMsYqlMekzVr1pYGAMb7MTjin50fuPf0ignYxozL+Jg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:O-G-WeZFJEzz4T6D2kn1T_WfXHFa-u17vxfRK31wmHgk7ocs_dvQNg>
X-Sasl-enc: WktLBefgbdwTR1wcikWf1LCBDlqEtnqNXl1+Qgqz+I77 1505681723
Received: from aither.local (unknown [76.25.3.152]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 371EF7E446; Sun, 17 Sep 2017 16:55:23 -0400 (EDT)
To: Sam Whited <sam@samwhited.com>
Cc: precis@ietf.org
References: <150024725625.303.17137036571104960991@ietfa.amsl.com> <33f7468c-6742-7cbe-fa6f-70002c35cc62@stpeter.im> <CAHbk4RLa5AZp+sKUMoVOE2VsUmaDKGdWBqoTvurU_o=rj_OM0g@mail.gmail.com> <1504880015.1561911.1099626960.6CB0430C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <bd11bb2f-81a7-4081-ed49-15fa0fcb117c@stpeter.im> <1505397979.578298.1106052760.03A5025F@webmail.messagingengine.com> <0fc31e75-7893-c982-30b4-a6fe4ecae5fb@stpeter.im> <1505675616.1686212.1109016016.7A9E7FFE@webmail.messagingengine.com> <a50d8f06-2a2e-5062-5a9d-ace5b718090c@stpeter.im> <1505681506.1709856.1109072624.0D72B3D4@webmail.messagingengine.com>
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Message-ID: <406663e1-8829-8e45-2716-904a657fd3af@stpeter.im>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 14:55:22 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1505681506.1709856.1109072624.0D72B3D4@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5HWHtha59X7qQgTNgpAPifdmGqvkLWPDS"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/precis/Y630S0FaL605RDYYLcZKBmApOV4>
Subject: Re: [precis] I-D Action: draft-ietf-precis-7564bis-09.txt
X-BeenThere: precis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Preparation and Comparison of Internationalized Strings <precis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/precis>, <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/precis/>
List-Post: <mailto:precis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis>, <mailto:precis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 20:55:29 -0000

On 9/17/17 2:51 PM, Sam Whited wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 17, 2017, at 15:41, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> Why would an application need to care about this? This is an internal
>> implementation detail of a PRECIS library/API, and IMHO it would be
>> irresponsible of the library/API author to offer an option for
>> application developers to select how many times to apply the rules.
> 
> That's fair, but in that case this specific profile is a special case
> that takes a massive performance penalty even when it doesn't need too
> (if the library author did this at all).
> 
> My point is that we can't count on this, and there are still opinions
> and if's in that statement. We should be trying to make this as secure
> as possible at the spec level; regardless of what we feel might be more
> important, if it's easier to not do this, or it incurs a big performance
> penalty to do it some library authors probably won't.
> 
>> Sam, I am going to reiterate that we are EXTREMELY close to publication
>> of this document - it could have happened on, say, Thursday morning
>> right before you posted to the list about this. Please please please
>> either propose very specific text or point to an earlier email message
>> where you did so, because personally I have forgotten if you already did
>> that and my recollection from the previous discussion was that you did
>> not raise objections to the compromise text that Bill Fisher and I
>> agreed on. If your proposal is that we make significant changes to the
>> document at this time, then the Working Group chair or Area Director
>> will likely have to suggest a path forward, because your feedback is
>> coming so very late in the process.
> 
> I don't have a specific solution; I understand that this would require
> reworking the Nickname profile to not use NFKD which is a huge change,
> and that's unfortunate, but I still do not beleive it's appropriate to
> publish this document in its current form. I voiced this opinion early
> on, and the compormise change did nothing to address it, so I did not
> voice it again at that time, maybe I should hvae. I am voicing the
> feedback again now because I think the spotify article is better
> evidence that this is a real problem than I had before.

In that case, we'll need to invoke the WG chair and/or AD.

Peter