Re: [smartpowerdir] Heads Up: Need info on Release 1 standards / expected standards coming out of PAPs

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Sun, 27 June 2010 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: smartpowerdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: smartpowerdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C05CD3A6873 for <smartpowerdir@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.318
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.318 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.281, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5oYMNyMjQ9JB for <smartpowerdir@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AFC43A6843 for <smartpowerdir@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369ADF24028 for <smartpowerdir@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:13:43 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9bFZlSz1wUo0 for <smartpowerdir@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:13:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.108] (pool-96-241-163-123.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.241.163.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DF71F24014 for <smartpowerdir@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:13:42 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <4C2778BE.6080804@vigilsec.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 12:13:50 -0400
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100512 Thunderbird/3.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: smartpowerdir@ietf.org
References: <D7A0423E5E193F40BE6E94126930C49307A5E0D861@MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov> <A3302C1A-7C75-4497-9D66-F91128820DC4@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <A3302C1A-7C75-4497-9D66-F91128820DC4@cisco.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [smartpowerdir] Heads Up: Need info on Release 1 standards / expected standards coming out of PAPs
X-BeenThere: smartpowerdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Members of the Smart Power Directorate <smartpowerdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smartpowerdir>, <mailto:smartpowerdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/smartpowerdir>
List-Post: <mailto:smartpowerdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:smartpowerdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smartpowerdir>, <mailto:smartpowerdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 16:13:34 -0000

Why do you think RFC 5878 is needed here.  I'm only aware of two
implementations, and they use very different authorization data.

Russ

On 6/27/2010 12:53 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
> Folks:
> 
> David is asking for a set of RFCs to include in the next iteration of NIST standards for the Smart Grid. Does anyone have a problem with or proposed changes to the following list?
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0768.txt
> 0768 User Datagram Protocol. J. Postel. August 1980. (Format: TXT=5896
>      bytes) (Also STD0006) (Status: STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0791.txt
> 0791 Internet Protocol. J. Postel. September 1981. (Format: TXT=97779
>      bytes) (Obsoletes RFC0760) (Updated by RFC1349) (Also STD0005)
>      (Status: STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0792.txt
> 0792 Internet Control Message Protocol. J. Postel. September 1981.
>      (Format: TXT=30404 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC0777) (Updated by RFC0950,
>      RFC4884) (Also STD0005) (Status: STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0793.txt
> 0793 Transmission Control Protocol. J. Postel. September 1981.
>      (Format: TXT=172710 bytes) (Updated by RFC1122, RFC3168) (Also
>      STD0007) (Status: STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2460.txt
> 2460 Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification. S. Deering, R.
>      Hinden. December 1998. (Format: TXT=85490 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1883)
>      (Updated by RFC5095, RFC5722, RFC5871) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4279.txt
> 4279 Pre-Shared Key Ciphersuites for Transport Layer Security (TLS).
>      P. Eronen, Ed., H. Tschofenig, Ed.. December 2005. (Format: TXT=32160
>      bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4301.txt
> 4301 Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol. S. Kent, K. Seo.
>      December 2005. (Format: TXT=262123 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC2401)
>      (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4347.txt
> 4347 Datagram Transport Layer Security. E. Rescorla, N. Modadugu.
>      April 2006. (Format: TXT=56014 bytes) (Updated by RFC5746) (Status:
>      PROPOSED STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4443.txt
> 4443 Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet
>      Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification. A. Conta, S. Deering, M.
>      Gupta, Ed.. March 2006. (Format: TXT=48969 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC2463)
>      (Updates RFC2780) (Updated by RFC4884) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4785.txt
> 4785 Pre-Shared Key (PSK) Ciphersuites with NULL Encryption for
>      Transport Layer Security (TLS). U. Blumenthal, P. Goel. January 2007.
>      (Format: TXT=9550 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5246.txt
> 5246 The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2. T.
>      Dierks, E. Rescorla. August 2008. (Format: TXT=222395 bytes)
>      (Obsoletes RFC3268, RFC4346, RFC4366) (Updates RFC4492) (Updated by
>      RFC5746, RFC5878) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5281.txt
> 5281 Extensible Authentication Protocol Tunneled Transport Layer
>      Security Authenticated Protocol Version 0 (EAP-TTLSv0). P. Funk, S.
>      Blake-Wilson. August 2008. (Format: TXT=117059 bytes) (Status:
>      INFORMATIONAL)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5430.txt
> 5430 Suite B Profile for Transport Layer Security (TLS). M. Salter, E.
>      Rescorla, R. Housley. March 2009. (Format: TXT=27586 bytes) (Status:
>      INFORMATIONAL)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5539.txt
> 5539 NETCONF over Transport Layer Security (TLS). M. Badra. May 2009.
>      (Format: TXT=16073 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5763.txt
> 5763 Framework for Establishing a Secure Real-time Transport Protocol
>      (SRTP) Security Context Using Datagram Transport Layer Security
>      (DTLS). J. Fischl, H. Tschofenig, E. Rescorla. May 2010. (Format:
>      TXT=81546 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED STANDARD)
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5878.txt
> 5878 Transport Layer Security (TLS) Authorization Extensions. M.
>      Brown, R. Housley. May 2010. (Format: TXT=44594 bytes) (Updates
>      RFC5246) (Status: EXPERIMENTAL)
> 
>