IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sidr] comments on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6485bis

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Mon, 14 April 2014 19:21 UTC

Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D391A06C9 for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:21:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.473
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.473 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 5Kx-vQyZJ3od for <sidr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.1.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D7F51A06C7 for <sidr@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:21:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dommiel.bbn.com ([192.1.122.15]:36482 helo=comsec.home) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1WZmRv-000CyW-72 for sidr@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:21:47 -0400
Message-ID: <534C3542.6080209@bbn.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 15:21:38 -0400
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sidr@ietf.org
References: <E293915D-2FA8-487C-AE8C-15A13263E559@tislabs.com> <60ECB09C-3502-48CD-A152-076AE5BF6E39@tislabs.com>
In-Reply-To: <60ECB09C-3502-48CD-A152-076AE5BF6E39@tislabs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/TcuLKCEy8UjLVESubfDy1UEoZWU
Subject: Re: [sidr] comments on draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6485bis
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 19:21:42 -0000

The CPS was written well before 6916 was finished.

A reference to that RFC now makes sense.

Steve

On 4/14/14 10:43 AM, Sandra Murphy wrote:
> And one "I forgot":
>
>     CAs and RPs SHOULD be capable of supporting a transition to allow for
>     the phased introduction of additional encryption algorithms and key
>     specifications,
>
> Is this any different than the algorithm agility in RFC6916?  If so, I'd think
> a reference would be good. If not, could you explain?
>
> --Sandy, speaking as regular ol' member
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email