Re: [saag] AD sponsoring draft-josefsson-scrypt-kdf

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Fri, 14 August 2015 11:32 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53BE11ACD5B for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 04:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 o_tka4CLaITy for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 04:32:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F0D71ACD74 for <saag@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 04:32:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 103B8BECA; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:32:26 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DI5bXgJBDyBw; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:32:25 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.180] (stephen-think.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.180]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4B53BEC0; Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:32:22 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1439551945; bh=E5XWCy+gnmNnUsWmgnZoju9mzZ/qLtL1UH9FF0nLRr4=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=rKdJ5i+O4yOnUdrPPza2OtYKMWD6wWZ9Spdbhx0F248xibPIrgd50o9EUIf+VN6se ChzlaEJBe6hcb8sY6q7pJ3uxVIHSrLg0hi7Gn9IgcLjJyorosMJ6DHdEaCe482q4VE z2+qVZbJEvR3lqjlr5/Brtpon1i3ANJBKbSLSFe4=
Message-ID: <55CDD1BA.6030100@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:32:10 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>
References: <559153E0.5050102@cs.tcd.ie> <55C932F6.7080203@cs.tcd.ie> <87y4hg9lnt.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <CAJU7za+GW8HWCuTzG7YuV2k=pDFrkkGxaxQ9h+=Q6xG9NyQQ8A@mail.gmail.com> <871tf79rqk.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1508132026040.22210@multics.mit.edu> <87oaia8nkh.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
In-Reply-To: <87oaia8nkh.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
OpenPGP: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="XRun6Nksn5mD4xEkW6nfDa9iKIt8JpJ4R"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/hJreFWCe7USMl8PEwQjYogZlwlw>
Cc: "saag@ietf.org" <saag@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [saag] AD sponsoring draft-josefsson-scrypt-kdf
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 11:32:31 -0000


On 14/08/15 06:07, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> I agree with ianG that the world has changed here, and it
> should be fine to use URLs like this when there isn't any better
> alternative available.

Using URLs is fine, and sometimes the best that can be done.

I think the RFC editor are reasonably enough concerned that
bitrot does kick in and they, and we, do like that decades
old RFC references can still be de-referenced.

So in general I think it's reasonable to question any case
where the only reference is via a URL hosted on a domain
that one considers might not be there in 20 years. And having
asked the question, it can also be reasonable to just use
such a URL if that's the best there is.

S.