Re: [saag] shorthand for iPAddress subjectAltName?

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 30 September 2020 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 78CE83A0B38 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 09:32:50 -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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Qn3N_Yl77tDO for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 09:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E85453A0B57 for <saag@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 09:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3DA0389EA; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:37:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id f5dDxyF5CdEs; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:37:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4AF389E9; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:37:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7F61D5; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:32:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
cc: saag@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <20200929230010.GC89563@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <20200929230010.GC89563@kduck.mit.edu>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:32:43 -0400
Message-ID: <30011.1601483563@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/bAZo1ei4uCwgIlCGRamaE9AX7XA>
Subject: Re: [saag] shorthand for iPAddress subjectAltName?
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: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 16:32:51 -0000

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote:
    > to (e.g.)  DNS-ID and <other-thing>.  I'm currently reviewing a
    > document that proposes NETWORK-ID (for "network address") but am
    > planning to counter-propose "IPADDR-ID".  Does anyone else have
    > thoughts on what a good practice here would be?

I agree that NETWORK-ID could mis-construed, and the more specific name is
better.  An FQDN could be considered a "network address", and I'm sure there
are people who feel their @mcr314 twitter handle is the one and true "network address".

There will naturally be confusion if this is an IP(v4)ADDR-ID or IPv6ADDR-ID,
while iPAddress SAN deals with both.   I think we can live with that though.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide