IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Secdispatch] Two topics of discussion for the Sec Dispatch session

Atul Tulshibagwale <atul@sgnl.ai> Fri, 15 March 2024 16:52 UTC

Return-Path: <atul@sgnl.ai>
X-Original-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA97C14F68B for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:52:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.085
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.085 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_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sgnl.ai
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GcgK8Xd8wEbX for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36D22C14F699 for <secdispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1dd10a37d68so19572205ad.2 for <secdispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sgnl.ai; s=google; t=1710521560; x=1711126360; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=bCAGD/cDK6bZP9V+fwBTNTeYhrOl6Fa59mRB3z8W0iA=; b=WRGLxHE+Htqc3W8v3zWBvtSNKG7vQRj/1y48HzMlCcmtJdXCCh/NWArv7icj/0JdaB RS2cFtORYJg9QM+k1H2p0B8CDX2sp++Aq6/yKIRJ+zFI4iXBXhBF6ggTSxvESi06+uXX RadEVgBSIOGQfFx1ep0wKPdURyIgCszqdP+rQy1Qf1GfKKgrr6nVY5x75tTF1Kx6k3XZ Hgv52RUUTUYhXzHJUKG8FHsFq1WVSCdcrql5202y+dri1j9Bx36FH2zlum2rlklqDvx8 zeqZXtNGGrc2m6ZHwtLEh9ZPVpnhda/L7rFyj0jCRK/gy7bcxkNaXkepiF9/egrxQos0 7oxw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1710521560; x=1711126360; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=bCAGD/cDK6bZP9V+fwBTNTeYhrOl6Fa59mRB3z8W0iA=; b=govG1KaZQtO9QYbv/3IYuUQGH9sFGQcW2SjELWGHQItqYpit1fEm0qWrHD0PC74FkK dgdLleXHHoZaSrXZykDM203MusFqlC9VJo9DxdLUVUWF6RA5Nx8paCFnzuGqH02BZwvb FwBpeY8olkPz9eJAMzrw/XudxGJsxZr3qCXQnVPGUzdplzPW3diLttJL5xQp15t4HQJW qqF0rTADJDwdI62wRBn574wC4LNrZMRMAZW64XooWzR7BiuwvGKi9qkkVzqHBLqmZBb0 I5Zlj8U3On0cOPdsB3zoLxXvGZ7gPj4Y+CNsWeNeZOcqXMkx8pUZuF7HCr2UN8GwzWIU zdcQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywk1dubadRjt5Kb8e3RO5N3m+1e+kR3QAAAW2GerYJUD5UU5Jrs CaTc1U/p+zxnAhK1WXJXkTOJmBmCe2P3aBQwOap+eOsbyWTQvN3WhWuwMiiwC4EzHH/wvege/nt nW2Un/9qwzhwq2BZmO5peBeW+l+OLOFAqredSW8HW/4trQ/GJn+c=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHEyzsUkpj+6GNKqt8bKNtVIQG2J7VwZpymKMluwJhzLxppvhy2185KCjdz5xSjjpik5KWo23iSSn+qumkxNtM=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:cecc:b0:1dd:8bc5:afe3 with SMTP id d12-20020a170902cecc00b001dd8bc5afe3mr6757649plg.1.1710521560325; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANtBS9ef-mNee-p2gz50MhYAKmnJ_CqiTfBA9oe6UA8-HgiouQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADNypP9oVBThjyEWDavpJ1dqUQc0-757uOpeMXyJC_qLf6OKwg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADNypP9oVBThjyEWDavpJ1dqUQc0-757uOpeMXyJC_qLf6OKwg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Atul Tulshibagwale <atul@sgnl.ai>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 22:22:30 +0530
Message-ID: <CANtBS9f2HfYgqFh7zyF+Lw6E57uA8QNb2qzM4rVY_NEZ2=fMow@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <rifaat.s.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: secdispatch@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fbfcc10613b5d554"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdispatch/8z1oEoQzmVzjlsMvElo1Hz2MqYM>
Subject: Re: [Secdispatch] Two topics of discussion for the Sec Dispatch session
X-BeenThere: secdispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Dispatch <secdispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdispatch>, <mailto:secdispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 16:52:46 -0000

Thanks Rifaat,
I'll follow your recommendation.

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024, 8:13 PM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <rifaat.s.ietf@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 3:02 AM Atul Tulshibagwale <atul@sgnl.ai> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> There are a couple of topics for which I have been seeking answers. I
>> don't know if these are appropriate topics for the saag session next week.
>> I will be attending remotely, and can prepare a presentation for the second
>> point below if required.
>>
>>    1. *Errata to RFC 9493* There is an errata required for RFC9493
>>    <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9493/> (Subject Identifiers for
>>    Security Event Tokens). The errata request is here
>>    <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid7727>. The errata requests a
>>    change to the registry created by this RFC, and there was consensus
>>    on the mailing list
>>    <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/id-event/-S-MsO2W6PeFF_O5kjP8om-7QNM/>
>>    that the errata should be accepted and the appropriate change reflected in
>>    the IANA registry. However, since the WG is completed, there was no clear
>>    identification of how to go about making these changes. If there is
>>    discussion required on this topic, we should have it in the meeting in
>>    Brisbane.
>>
>> This should be discussed with the Security ADs.
>
>
>>
>>    1. *New PushPull Delivery Proposal* While we currently have specified
>>    Push delivery (RFC 8935
>>    <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8935>) and Poll delivery (RFC
>>    8936 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8936>), we are seeing
>>    a clear requirement in the OpenID Shared Signals Working Group (SSWG) where
>>    a Transmitter is also a Receiver, and we would like to have a way of
>>    symmetric asynchronous event delivery. I would like to propose a new spec
>>    for this, but since the WG is closed, I wanted to know how to go about
>>    doing this. I realize the date for proposing new ideas for IETF 119 is
>>    past, but I can propose it after IETF 119 and discuss it in Vancouver. The
>>    topic I would like to discuss in IETF 119 is: What is the venue to propose
>>    this new idea for a combined "push and pull" delivery mechanism?
>>
>> I suggest that you first create a draft and then discuss the dispatch
> question on this mailing list.
>
> Regards,
>  Rifaat
>
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Atul
>>
>> --
>>
>> <https://sgnl.ai>
>>
>> Atul Tulshibagwale
>>
>> CTO
>>
>> <https://linkedin.com/in/tulshi> <https://twitter.com/zirotrust>
>> <atul@sgnl.ai>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Secdispatch mailing list
>> Secdispatch@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdispatch
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email