IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] Considerations about the need to resume PKIX work

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Mon, 31 July 2017 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA69C13264E for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:27:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
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 4vGloLTcBzAV for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 B8C12129AAD for <spasm@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:27:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v6VGR6OR022931; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:27:40 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=wIlnSFDMnt740g2K8FnG2UsXtEIC/HhyKQXlASLjQ+Y=; b=PtvAKECJneHvZMXyne7Rx5ZYu9zkpVjsSTsk0yJa9MVtJTWTeNEtRJhynLV0tBbwEqty HSCwuaAHRRg5r6bmxfKx/IbuID+ecbONt7xG2ZmuvV7YsfJMFOmOtO+sAoZQfSKEKiQK ZuxbJJnbbN0V/GBIRaPTS+VkZ0u+97oOHvVLRtdZFcEynoH+wA6rHI58WymV54LIAYkk rasVnJhi0p3GJVAKW/Zp+UUBpPh0XbmU94nTSFZWFqvl5pS3tcXmSTM7mgrHI3vwRMAj Ti9evGnl6DYW0EeUr9sYjVaQDr05Ig7V349gXlXkxPhgpbSRDjKG4xFsa7cnv0i0mqm7 IQ==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint3 ([96.6.114.86]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2c0hwea3mq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:27:40 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v6VGQ8pV023917; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:27:39 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.32]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2c0npvw3ak-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:27:39 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:27:37 -0700
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:27:37 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: "Dang, Quynh (Fed)" <quynh.dang@nist.gov>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, "Dr. Pala" <director@openca.org>
CC: LAMPS <spasm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [lamps] Considerations about the need to resume PKIX work
Thread-Index: AQHTAUyY94hRJDBoU0q9vnCXZD5pTqJc2zUAgAhKpACACQsx0A==
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 16:27:36 +0000
Message-ID: <0a12992260ec44ebab8cff0426670cc8@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <04e73e42-7c5b-912d-cc79-7959a710927e@openca.org>, <C9C409F5-778F-4BEF-98B7-10D86996F1F8@vigilsec.com> <CY4PR09MB1464D8F73E5F96E76ED62B6BF3B80@CY4PR09MB1464.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR09MB1464D8F73E5F96E76ED62B6BF3B80@CY4PR09MB1464.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.34.207]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0a12992260ec44ebab8cff0426670cc8usma1exdag1mb1msgcorpak_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-07-31_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1706020000 definitions=main-1707310279
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-07-31_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1706020000 definitions=main-1707310279
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/G6Oyn09hZW3te4eAtWS4wfSK_d8>
Subject: Re: [lamps] Considerations about the need to resume PKIX work
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 16:27:43 -0000

I am also curious to see what concrete things could be done to improve revocation.  If the answer is “nothing” that’s okay, but if it’s not, I expect OpenSSL will have to write some code :)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email