IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <rifaat.s.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 15 March 2024 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <rifaat.s.ietf@gmail.com>
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 0E044C14F60A for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 07:43:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.084
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.084 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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=gmail.com
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 518qANK3x2bm for <secdispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 07:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com (mail-wm1-x332.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::332]) (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 18909C14F616 for <secdispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 07:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-41324a16c9eso14028355e9.0 for <secdispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 07:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1710513795; x=1711118595; 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=TDwZOLbDFfV+6O/DlBcxtjw1coBEsFvFsaperq7RkbI=; b=drEwUMIH/+wFZg1Ihca1iHY6x3tg1+YsJQ4pW0zvo1DoUqDxxWFic7LnK3+TMxJW4o fQh6NPPOOvdurysMo/FE/IbYcdZqza97ZSyLTTl7WhEW3V1LmunzRS4V7Vf+NnUfrjiW cbIBoTSG52MmN8V9vXRIWvkZEsxjB/OrVC2yxUQV1zUG8UzDItUFu1mxm2UIz4GNbh7r JWkL3qvLwYZJjRu9Oweq5R4RtbITbQp06qaCerj/12ZXBogSQR5QwJbmeKLfXzTLwsNC 1KQdBqcala5vkVWqdMf1sQM2qQznSUy2DDXIREY1IAkFfeKZinW89pEQT7QFc/DEnu3S 2E1g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1710513795; x=1711118595; 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=TDwZOLbDFfV+6O/DlBcxtjw1coBEsFvFsaperq7RkbI=; b=REfgIXZbdbx3ej/HD5SH2VmmvhSM1zYprdiUQBl+eCmdplTxv9ztHKMv2gohqu3LAK 5jCpWXd1jkjZgVoIS5LNi0zRPI8T2W7EtkMcfNPRhEz+o2kynD+jMH3+idlGss4dOH/r Thb4rt96rzVB1ULxs4G4dKOPvtNWc0LjBTfBfLRjaKkSUZACikMETUGIiZg4R8/gS5wZ 8f6Lg9lDCIRjN/VF9d9MNVOSb9qmzsMu4uxPqCWvOpm+u7pqM/RzTuITLiPe8jiRipJY o18wj4OS7SbiCrDv6GtavN0aofnnwbPQUIhlo2Bn5WMIqsqxDb5p2pR7+2kqVKTSD+ZE dWSw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyh0pRKCVdpp1fFrNMOeFeDvDJTmR+N3F8cxRbE5FYojWMyntPx ws8g3qKFzHXhUPbqJQCftjFRZE6+xAHDfqpMiNGjLexreYU9j6EYAAE2xKmJe5a5ylBWVRjwlB6 OgAnN/Xkni4Eib23m+Rwm/edS+2mw+dHMLrE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEdb3km6+Qq/nlHWlngU/BFLzB0IynYqboXOnCkbNd32FDlhI54Ii0TF+kwAtJ5rYBRIKyhxRgR+MU40oNLaEs=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4ec7:b0:413:2e49:3e05 with SMTP id g7-20020a05600c4ec700b004132e493e05mr4209100wmq.12.1710513795139; Fri, 15 Mar 2024 07:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANtBS9ef-mNee-p2gz50MhYAKmnJ_CqiTfBA9oe6UA8-HgiouQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANtBS9ef-mNee-p2gz50MhYAKmnJ_CqiTfBA9oe6UA8-HgiouQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <rifaat.s.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 10:43:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CADNypP9oVBThjyEWDavpJ1dqUQc0-757uOpeMXyJC_qLf6OKwg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Atul Tulshibagwale <atul@sgnl.ai>
Cc: secdispatch@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000248f630613b40783"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdispatch/GoDRjgA-tvyq_EPI6s0_-PIk2VA>
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 14:43:21 -0000

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