Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-15, closes 29 June 2020
Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@arm.com> Tue, 30 June 2020 05:49 UTC
Return-Path: <Hannes.Tschofenig@arm.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 1CBAE3A0848; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 22:49:49 -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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=armh.onmicrosoft.com header.b=3K/D/wdB; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=armh.onmicrosoft.com header.b=3K/D/wdB
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 ckp8myi43t53; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 22:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr150049.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.15.49]) (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 D46E83A0843; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 22:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armh.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-armh-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DHNY6e6drQpb5LLjwN3jXSqT+h+DsNJZfOGjk1VjNdU=; b=3K/D/wdBS3cOmeB6fme2sDKnmVBJYrXCRJY3KnpfPofXLFubc4jfCEUO/HoknVL5VnoXHgivD7463EZQglPLuzekCuUkY6P0l3PjgAyHPeyl2lb+t9jO57Wlt4+3651ncn9SM0zvkokxiS6jEZ9oY92qf12eOq+ARwaa6lHaf4c=
Received: from AM6P194CA0063.EURP194.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:209:84::40) by DB7PR08MB3163.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:5:1e::21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3131.24; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:42 +0000
Received: from VE1EUR03FT010.eop-EUR03.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10a6:209:84:cafe::22) by AM6P194CA0063.outlook.office365.com (2603:10a6:209:84::40) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3131.21 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:41 +0000
X-MS-Exchange-Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 63.35.35.123) smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; ietf.org; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=armh.onmicrosoft.com;ietf.org; dmarc=bestguesspass action=none header.from=arm.com;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of arm.com designates 63.35.35.123 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=63.35.35.123; helo=64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com;
Received: from 64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com (63.35.35.123) by VE1EUR03FT010.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.18.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3131.20 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:41 +0000
Received: ("Tessian outbound 1e00bf306733:v60"); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:41 +0000
X-CR-MTA-TID: 64aa7808
Received: from b3a7da81ee79.1 by 64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com id 7E9EB3E3-3243-4B16-8922-C2FC23E844C6.1; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:36 +0000
Received: from EUR05-VI1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com by 64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com with ESMTPS id b3a7da81ee79.1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384); Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:36 +0000
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Evz9uSOzx1HPapjKRnTDQs10s/oeU4RzhAcmWHYNa3yzOejP51lrNPKTC/mml+os3aWKcdRumNK04Y0TQYHpKrSZPPsNF2XkpfEAvPCCFl7zlYJJpGPa/nFrnsnchwBw+gMRB8o5Mu3fY3BJhOHKHQ6+1QIozjpYyTSDzetc+CgDWf806TV/V9ItJmh5whg9ZLzU7ezb9iYM8O1GAaNBwsoOaNip19syBeAmVfjrNNdxh7aQhAKAuzzj1uf751gKFIGnqgmgrp8DUsLD3yXo7KKcAjoVILwpvOdkk6+MxXfUWLPlqh/UV0ejzah3POCavovUOB3QPrDsdrkft7HAzA==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DHNY6e6drQpb5LLjwN3jXSqT+h+DsNJZfOGjk1VjNdU=; b=cTYyrJvwuUMi6BSBced+81h12m+/x8GJZZREf4QPi0BC7X4P1uFVXfSoAr8x5pSi40JZk8dwm4d8tHTyitfSNQIUlfNWt3WfMumP1WsAoivrQ8W1Vwsiw7x+XFRqhEf9n3t7aQqFn0nKKc9ynY0evK6kwRiDjpeQEE6H+N/hhGtQ3IorsX5LWfA9Pg+MtLjHwiTvzYeXPbCjeQniIWzkdXtvwI+tAfilYFB0vfoMHVK04MPCsTfoWU8hJ14zYhW3FoTNaMSf9VR2BFfzNsof99rdXHJmn2iO93FK5Tp9A9hJ5AyXhxHMqlHRWK+NvxkRvGs3+UeN+329UKoSachCjg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass header.d=arm.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armh.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-armh-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DHNY6e6drQpb5LLjwN3jXSqT+h+DsNJZfOGjk1VjNdU=; b=3K/D/wdBS3cOmeB6fme2sDKnmVBJYrXCRJY3KnpfPofXLFubc4jfCEUO/HoknVL5VnoXHgivD7463EZQglPLuzekCuUkY6P0l3PjgAyHPeyl2lb+t9jO57Wlt4+3651ncn9SM0zvkokxiS6jEZ9oY92qf12eOq+ARwaa6lHaf4c=
Received: from AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:208:106::13) by AM0PR08MB4979.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:208:15e::25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3131.24; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:34 +0000
Received: from AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::39f5:e4d9:51ff:eae]) by AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::39f5:e4d9:51ff:eae%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3131.027; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:34 +0000
From: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@arm.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>
CC: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, IETF SAAG <saag@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-15, closes 29 June 2020
Thread-Index: AdY9/kL5KQoLk/CbSKeZ9xMZ8uq3SAQe3d4AAAnHrZA=
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:34 +0000
Message-ID: <AM0PR08MB3716528B48BCF9447002B551FA6F0@AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <MN2PR19MB40450EE357BEECD723AB06F183820@MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com> <CABcZeBM9A1RxOiHGZdBznTb7zzArG5GTQs=bhNtBy90tSXs3Pg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBM9A1RxOiHGZdBznTb7zzArG5GTQs=bhNtBy90tSXs3Pg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ts-tracking-id: dad07de4-f3cf-4a4b-ba7b-bc9211a08c0b.1
x-checkrecipientchecked: true
Authentication-Results-Original: rtfm.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;rtfm.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
x-originating-ip: [80.92.121.249]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-HT: Tenant
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 1117347e-e5d2-4c59-b1bd-08d81cb96242
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM0PR08MB4979:|DB7PR08MB3163:
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: <DB7PR08MB316316D5A84F696BD9A11E52FA6F0@DB7PR08MB3163.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
x-checkrecipientrouted: true
nodisclaimer: true
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0450A714CB
X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Untrusted: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info-Original: P5kKRKjft1orSy83BGivXVLb3i68w3DoP59wGxpk8jIDAtySok6XrN3HP8RM/V9TmY3aKoX4r+GTW3uMbJON1PSMQ7jNcQ7MY+1hpylnE7T/xbK1wa9w6fL+fTmzGe5nZIuMBovVW/C/co7zvki/QekwNDSB5vGsfMZVE5wKRUQPsp+qc97hbUlMGVbJyHjfE6gOt8yrQX8ha77LzaeVOMyOXz3bf8IStwBf8ecSSmiHZWtgD54b9OXc0YTf8faNVUrelvGibVnwdvjJUxNPDXMxi06NBreDIUHB+Ic2HNjHe+RJ3s9F5hMq4PJHnkeFyXR/VTLdH0n46aiit8Wmr5PAiDrwZruqyaWgo53GqKpEqmjkeMvZd83tirSynd6W6auXyCNZIfwHKdWV64VXZw==
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report-Untrusted: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:AM0PR08MB3716.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(136003)(396003)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(366004)(86362001)(9686003)(71200400001)(55016002)(478600001)(8936002)(53546011)(26005)(966005)(6506007)(8676002)(186003)(76116006)(66476007)(316002)(7696005)(66946007)(66446008)(54906003)(5660300002)(64756008)(66556008)(83380400001)(66574015)(166002)(52536014)(33656002)(2906002)(110136005)(4326008); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_AM0PR08MB3716528B48BCF9447002B551FA6F0AM0PR08MB3716eurp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR08MB4979
Original-Authentication-Results: rtfm.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;rtfm.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStripped: VE1EUR03FT010.eop-EUR03.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:63.35.35.123; CTRY:IE; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:CAL; SFV:NSPM; H:64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com; PTR:ec2-63-35-35-123.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(136003)(396003)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(46966005)(9686003)(166002)(356005)(30864003)(82740400003)(5660300002)(966005)(55016002)(8936002)(81166007)(82310400002)(47076004)(7696005)(336012)(33964004)(2906002)(53546011)(6506007)(86362001)(450100002)(110136005)(33656002)(26005)(186003)(66574015)(8676002)(54906003)(70586007)(70206006)(316002)(36906005)(52536014)(83380400001)(4326008)(478600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id-Prvs: aecb4ccd-8b76-4d7d-c254-08d81cb95df1
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0450A714CB
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: x8h04QvxD28yGgRQq31JIwlKb53NOTZYZKnZdjbuKcPU5RkaVc82Wv/w/O+CKeVPqSF1WRC4rjZT+LlnjrWWQoCOhecH7yJCOa68MTlb9UwvDhBi0VrkGf+X77Nzq560lBSq2xMLho0gbAz8PWVI9vXKPNsBJ5fNo7BEjdY1PR51x/U+pZGY7otHFHTVQkZmzGEgodPVi+y+4Uynl0pNcpWguxcX5fKCa6S6HSdEX7zve2+n6gGgze0jG1DT0/f9MWD8uFT882rHYfYTEz+G3/O3Q6vqlR+8/vAzlhqexYaB9XSwpfRPaUJ5FR7z9AuoMEfIU7ztLjrfWW8iZBD3aySP/3m7zEFeSkaSUBtEwjPfr/6m2PG9Nhqlh6dtuu5fnKdTY3LrbDIqTUfjdzLyAdnrtFb7Sw1nYbc4XQOK8k5uuhcRsna9eqVrtWsrryrXgqkz1gklST/Y+1pnrerZBmaLoAZ1R0/0+9QrIkuAXJ0=
X-OriginatorOrg: arm.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jun 2020 05:49:41.4141 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1117347e-e5d2-4c59-b1bd-08d81cb96242
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: f34e5979-57d9-4aaa-ad4d-b122a662184d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=f34e5979-57d9-4aaa-ad4d-b122a662184d; Ip=[63.35.35.123]; Helo=[64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: VE1EUR03FT010.eop-EUR03.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB7PR08MB3163
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/fSIzMwmw_fwEx8JeHB__HTGvC5c>
Subject: Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-15, closes 29 June 2020
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, 30 Jun 2020 05:49:49 -0000
I believe this document signals a wrong message to the wider Internet community. I agree that it should not be published as a consensus document. I understand that some people are unhappy about encrypting more meta-data. This prevents them from doing things they used to do in the past, some of which they should have never done in the first place. Improving the protection of meta-data is important and well supported by a large number of activities in the IETF (the notable exception being CoAP+OSCORE). Ciao Hannes From: saag <saag-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Eric Rescorla Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 3:00 AM To: Black, David <David.Black@dell.com> Cc: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>; tsvwg@ietf.org; IETF SAAG <saag@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-15, closes 29 June 2020 > > This 3rd WGLC is limited to the following two topics: > > > Whether or not to proceed with a request for RFC publication > > of the draft. The decision on whether or not to proceed will > be based on rough consensus of the WG, see RFC 7282. > During the 2nd WGLC, Eric Rescorla and David Schinazi expressed > strong views that this draft should not be published – those > concerns have not been resolved and are carried forward to > this WGLC. This email message was an attempt to summarize > those concerns: > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/i4qyY1HRqKwm0Jme9UtEb6DyhXU/ > > Further explanation from both Eric Rescorla and David Schinazi > is welcome and encouraged to ensure that their concerns are > clearly understood. Well, I'll try again, but I'm not sure that I can do better than I have before. For reasons that are laid out in RFC 7258, the trend in protocol design in IETF is towards encrypting more and more. The last two transport protocols that were designed and widely deployed (SCTP over DTLS and QUIC) both encrypt the vast majority of the protocol metadata. This document advertises itself as "considerations" for design of such protocols: The transport protocols developed for the Internet are used across a wide range of paths across network segments with many different regulatory, commercial, and engineering considerations. This document considers some of the costs and changes to network management and research that are implied by widespread use of transport protocols that encrypt their transport header information. It reviews the implications of developing transport protocols that use end-to-end encryption to provide confidentiality of their transport layer headers, and considers the effect of such changes on transport protocol design, transport protocol evolution, and network operations. It also considers some anticipated implications on application evolution. This provides considerations relating to the design of transport protocols and features where the transport protocol encrypts some or all of their header information. However, as I said above, the new transport protocols that are actually being designed already feature metadata encryption and as far as I can tell, there is no prospective protocol new transport protocol design project for which these issues might be live. In that context, it's hard not to read this document with its long litany of practices which are impacted by metadata encryption as a critique of the decisions by SCTP/DTLS and QUIC to encrypt most of the metadata. This impression is reinforced by the description of the actual practices themselves, which focuses almost entirely on practices which appear to be benignly motivated (e.g., performance monitoring, troubleshooting, etc.) However, we also know that metadata is widely used for practices in which the network operator is adversarial to the user, for instance: - Blocking traffic based on TCP port, IP address, SNI, etc. - Performance-based traffic class discrimination - Monitoring the user's behavior via indicia like the ones above or via traffic analysis (see [0]) Yes, I understand that the authors explicitly disclaim judgement on these practices, and the document does briefly touch on the general idea, though the "concerns...have been voiced" tends to minimize those concerns [1] but the selection of practices to focus on is extremely telling. Focusing on the downsides of encryption for (at least arguably well-meaning) network players while mostly ignoring the large class of non-benign behaviors which encryption is intended to protect against has the effect of overemphasizing the costs of encryption to those players and minimizing the benefits to the endpoints whom it is intended to protect. To be maximally clear: I don't object to this document existing and I don't think that the opinions implicit in it are ones that should not be expressed. I merely don't think that it should be published as an IETF Consensus document. -Ekr [0] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wood-pearg-website-fingerprinting-00#section-5 [1] Another motivation stems from increased concerns about privacy and surveillance. Users value the ability to protect their identity and location, and defend against analysis of the traffic. Revelations about the use of pervasive surveillance [RFC7624] have, to some extent, eroded trust in the service offered by network operators and have led to an increased use of encryption to avoid unwanted eavesdropping on communications. Concerns have also been voiced about the addition of information to packets by third parties to provide analytics, customisation, advertising, cross-site tracking of users, to bill the customer, or to selectively allow or block content. Whatever the reasons, the IETF is designing protocols that include transport header encryption (e.g., QUIC [I-D.ietf-quic-transport]) to supplement the already widespread payload encryption, and to further limit exposure of transport metadata to the network. IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
- [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-tsvwg… Black, David
- Re: [saag] [tsvwg] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draf… Paul Vixie
- [saag] Anticompetitive use of trademark and IETF … Tony Rutkowski
- Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-t… Kyle Rose
- Re: [saag] [tsvwg] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draf… Roni Even
- Re: [saag] [Int-area] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): d… Tom Herbert
- Re: [saag] [tsvwg] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draf… Holland, Jake
- Re: [saag] [tsvwg] [Int-area] 3rd WGLC (limited-s… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-t… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-t… Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [saag] [tsvwg] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draf… Colin Perkins
- Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-t… mohamed.boucadair
- Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-t… Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-t… Ruediger.Geib
- Re: [saag] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): draft-ietf-t… Kyle Rose
- Re: [saag] [Int-area] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): d… Dirk.von-Hugo
- Re: [saag] [Int-area] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): d… Joseph Touch
- Re: [saag] [Int-area] 3rd WGLC (limited-scope): d… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [saag] [Int-area] [tsvwg] 3rd WGLC (limited-s… tom petch
- Re: [saag] [tsvwg] [Int-area] 3rd WGLC (limited-s… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [saag] Anticompetitive use of trademark and I… Jeffrey Walton
- Re: [saag] Anticompetitive use of trademark and I… Tony Rutkowski
- Re: [saag] Anticompetitive use of trademark and I… John Levine
- Re: [saag] Anticompetitive use of trademark and I… Tony Rutkowski
- Re: [saag] Anticompetitive use of trademark and I… Tony Rutkowski
- Re: [saag] Anticompetitive use of trademark and I… John R Levine