IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces and draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer Document Track

"Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com> Wed, 09 September 2020 18:51 UTC

Return-Path: <jgould@verisign.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61BCD3A0CA1 for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 11:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=verisign.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 Cfo-hdYiyYXR for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 11:51:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail4.verisign.com (mail4.verisign.com [69.58.187.30]) (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 992B13A0C99 for <regext@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 11:51:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=verisign.com; l=3892; q=dns/txt; s=VRSN; t=1599677506; h=from:to:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject; bh=21FQeDSNf61GCkzbYlbF+snT2kKRTatbYtaCrwHCi2w=; b=INVK1isaTERl2l5wTfhQjwbSMfLj+3nvo4xIm9yHtmX37R770ZggNvpP brPyx1g53YGVcsmIwvqVOkBh7byLj00YwmpWy5H5wR/nt5rHRp0qmknfG z46B6fKZq0HJcwYoBKFKTT969IWY7Hq++RX9po+KefBJffr2N0IcYV+2E /K83MY1J8z5lfczVeVIudVi+Bo572GBK3GTiGl7KtObuSjMrYLnlqLA0B cQ1b4MF/VTs0PxWGyMR35sPntOM2nMyNSxJ+wtoruHNyXT8+SxPyifoFG Rvzp5snFbD1rWSU+YJUs3nmI5OUzWq4CzcsjUyvAv3PIgtX4+AZC0xLJ0 A==;
IronPort-SDR: t+xLKNYOHvivIFBNedlPYTv2dx2DMWwPw6YD3L/yuylj/E9vutL0NlyHy01hVf6jgoGNKLw2ZE b/ydqmgZ48I4z5LNxBeUL2u0xnSjQttlKZWLrYsy91OSz7s/KfihCvNG1YPyzoR2reqrZSC9S2 MC3yjxpcPPzuH8du9R7FWFcPBXV1x1PN2a4Yb+JRb1fmfkHeyoolRn77yWWMOygHh3B1WSADhz KesnA3YNa22Qppnp5Fkrrnc3wNcS/STsl2uPkURGHfGnKciCx3EyxpRIim92XBqRfzMfwjuQQT Mis=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,409,1592884800"; d="scan'208";a="2813775"
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23: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
X-IPAS-Result: A2HtBADxIllf/zCZrQpcAx4BAQsSDECBRAuDGoE0CoQukRMmg3mXZj0LAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEfEAQBAQKESQIXgXwlNwYOAgMBAQsBAQEFAQEBAQEGAwEBAQKGRQyCNyJ7PQk9AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBQIIB00HRwEfAQUjETobAgEIGAICHwcCAgIwFRACBAEJCYMmAbZcgTKKRIEOKoZZhmyBQj6BOAwQgk0+hD0XCiaCUDOCCyIEj3+DGKNTAweCZYhokU0egwmBJ4hIk16NW4NxDHmIZBKBWJUJAgQCBAUCFYFqgXxwFTsqAYI+CUcXAg2OVoM6ilZ0DiYDAgYBCQEBAwmNN4ERAQE
Received: from BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.48) by BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (10.173.153.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1979.3; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 14:51:44 -0400
Received: from BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::a89b:32d6:b967:337d]) by BRN1WNEX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([fe80::a89b:32d6:b967:337d%4]) with mapi id 15.01.1979.003; Wed, 9 Sep 2020 14:51:44 -0400
From: "Gould, James" <jgould@verisign.com>
To: "pm@dotandco.com" <pm@dotandco.com>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces and draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer Document Track
Thread-Index: AQHWheOcT0BFC5DLTU+UPg/snTMjhalg3yQA///JmgA=
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 18:51:44 +0000
Message-ID: <C165E73E-79BF-4420-973D-66C4DC1D08F2@verisign.com>
References: <086BAABE-36EB-449A-86B1-E68012BEBC2C@verisign.com> <13ab636f-1630-4173-b359-ef182145520b@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <13ab636f-1630-4173-b359-ef182145520b@www.fastmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.10.16.200509
x-originating-ip: [10.170.148.18]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <3C9C7994770D804CB1BF9F5FD88344B7@verisign.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/_9K_TIfzjkvvQAajSDfylOQlIaI>
Subject: Re: [regext] draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces and draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer Document Track
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 18:51:48 -0000

Patrick,

Thank you for your feedback.  I don't see these drafts as meeting the description of 4.2.1 of RFC 2026, which states 'The "Experimental" designation typically denotes a specification that is part of some research or development effort'.  The drafts certainly are not part of an R&D effort.  They define concrete practices to address security or compliance issues in implementing the RFCs.  The description in Section 5 of RFC 2026 for a BCP includes the reference to "is designed to be a way to standardize practices", which matches what is contained in the drafts.  The other option is a Standards Track Technical Specification (TS) that includes "any description of a protocol, service, procedure, convention, or format" in RFC 2026, where these drafts could fall into the "procedure, convention" portion of the TS description.  

I don't believe there is a dependency on the drafts being implemented widely for a long period of time for any of the tracks, including the BCP.  

-- 
 
JG



James Gould
Fellow Engineer
jgould@Verisign.com <applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/jgould@Verisign.com>

703-948-3271
12061 Bluemont Way
Reston, VA 20190

Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/>

On 9/9/20, 2:07 PM, "regext on behalf of Patrick Mevzek" <regext-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of pm@dotandco.com> wrote:

    
    
    On Tue, Sep 8, 2020, at 08:26, Gould, James wrote:
    >  
    > Both draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces and 
    > draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer are BCP drafts.  We have 
    > discussed the status of these drafts informally at prior REGEXT 
    > meetings and more formally at the IETF-108 REGEXT meeting.  Both drafts 
    > don’t define protocol, but define operational practices of using the 
    > existing EPP RFCs in a more secure or more compliant way.  I believe 
    > the drafts best match the purpose of a BCP.  Please respond on the list 
    > with your support for the BCP track or if you believe a different track 
    > should be used for one or both drafts.  
    
    I believe they both should be "Experimental" instead.
    
    They are not long term widespread "current practices" at all.
    
    As for "best" ones, I am still reserved.
    
    -- 
      Patrick Mevzek
      pm@dotandco.com
    
    _______________________________________________
    regext mailing list
    regext@ietf.org
    https://secure-web.cisco.com/1fo-40TgUtMNyaLZfhwQAczhAZI0Cq_66aqA7kCb2fhJFECNKUyrkQMZ6MHbDJtJxbEAkxSMdf2N8RqvTGVs1QZmqi_pe0iyjOZ2fyMa9ty7IU-ke7eYVdvgoYc0MDR_VuqiE-98Azn-5QjgkoJSRwVGloqG7nmhBp33XNC44XxZPAdOFNQ5rEGYKvhE84ukklWML2yXDjwmQQ54UVOP2CgWSSxrXY6R4VJ9LDa6rgkP24wkS3zSyQ7bLLXc7eNeGU-Ec-dzDmv4VYKL1FDLln8yT04Ic4hK1411WKzhh-b4/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fregext

v2.20.3 | Report a Bug | By Email