IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [saag] Will there be an RFC4949bis?

Metapolymath Majordomo <majordomo@metapolymath.com> Tue, 29 December 2020 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <kw@metapolymath.com>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813753A0977 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 12:01:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=metapolymath.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 p25NpTvhFBqe for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 12:01:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com (mail-lf1-x130.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) (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 389E13A0B08 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 12:00:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id m25so33139901lfc.11 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 12:00:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=metapolymath.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yUDv/MIX/4fTrRQUe05k+RD2XFZpyDJIFmWeUZj1pTs=; b=BZdO+giRxbxwch95qdluqkuINob+16ilsq8HEq2KxnzVOkOhTBtWz5EgMpJX5Vun9r ghvQExpCORXIV89zwNcRFj/j8hLaZ7QqG4l29oL32khr1yTC7SaFW/0bWZ1BcbZVX+NB cdiFA17w7BtnNdImBDwX9Gf8R3fvGy8DrslrK4jVevEFymYz1cY5hgy1+Tdo0/uonpia h/2aJAL8nRTGhU87vtE1m5TNivDaUADcp3vnAX3gjXwkF+XoCZT2Wvf7S3Q5a5MnDhmx Z9qrHvNntTc1ahEndM1fRtUT2LSeyHoJ+8EILzga4pjuuPb+fXZ4o2I0uEKWG6gt5I1Z F5Ng==
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=yUDv/MIX/4fTrRQUe05k+RD2XFZpyDJIFmWeUZj1pTs=; b=jIzrnRibK3SI1DS1jdoo7no2Tc5LtR1E2JFC7TNLGh0Hh1ANwyo3OW3KbYLvx2m2wn ADT4eAg5C2hq7LPMnjcjTi46sR5KOlDtLuew2KvgT7Us1Q/fPTZlJCx8fC/GvubiqPDd /yLeUpwxhIfzEXBcj4pF+FjBdsCNK8tOYBgFWSHsPL8hqFlK4X/sikleCZvENsA/GGW0 4T662+KHMSmkNIhXZEBv+Ko0ndJkgU2niFmlkcpe2do4n9Hi5z1uAsURTRyQEsHxEbq8 GmbujqlijmsG9vN8CdpuUCkjP9TJMxt5TPVk6CPj2QG7BDuauA/1iX34yk6u4vY6e43s v6Gg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ZnCXEwXlFIqAFHsvzF5yNFlSYHcziK7qEpq3aFgw813Jtp0Fx Cfez9bjnxBO6KkrGlcRJ5enk/VfRSGb7myN2lVFp4Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJweDNl6nAY4avFtf5IwB/vV7oGSiI4BDp/y4Kk4rTVGrQlpUmok/ITBr7kyb8Ugs6Za+igSXk6Ve0aDW5VVSgo=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9acf:: with SMTP id p15mr24044844ljj.192.1609272057791; Tue, 29 Dec 2020 12:00:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAN40gSub=7hbvg6rJueRzkoHy6ejQ+An9ioeWbUmzB0FmfZUKA@mail.gmail.com> <29141.1609269580@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <29141.1609269580@localhost>
From: Metapolymath Majordomo <majordomo@metapolymath.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 14:00:47 -0600
Message-ID: <CABtv6o-qQg9ogcffNMwqxSST6dxFBJFYEskULr+25AJQFgO-tw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic@gmail.com>, saag@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005a1d3b05b79fd996"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/YQ1gfBLMqQmofzySkd93EVBgmxs>
Subject: Re: [saag] Will there be an RFC4949bis?
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/saag/>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 20:04:20 -0000

Concur on amendments option.

On Tue, Dec 29, 2020, 1:20 PM Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic@gmail.com> wrote:
>     > The Internet Glossary is a very useful resource to many authors and
> many
>     > SDOs.  But it was published in August 2007, several eras of
> technology in
>     > the past.  Since the definitions are often out-of-date in their
> references
>     > to
>     > source SDO definitions, they are sometimes inaccurate for current
> usage.
>
> hi, I'm told that 4949 took a lot of compromise to arrive at.
> (I personally can't recall the debate at all, but I had a new baby around
> that time)
>
> I think that doing 4949bis is probably the wrong approach.
> Instead, I would suggest a round of Updates (Amends) 4949, and then later
> on,
> collect it back.
>
> We had a discussion a few weeks ago about on-path attackers vs packet
> dropping.
> I wrote draft-richardson-saag-onpath-attacker-00 to capture that
> discussion,
> and bring it forward, and yes, Amend rfc4949. (co-authors sought)
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>            Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
> _______________________________________________
> saag mailing list
> saag@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email