IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] Benjamin Kaduk's Yes on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-06: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Wed, 20 June 2018 19:42 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
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 BDF11130F58; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 QJ495s4VZN9y; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu [18.9.25.14]) (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 E898D130E0D; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:42:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 1209190e-8c5ff70000000888-0e-5b2aae2e15a5
Received: from mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.43]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-3.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id EA.B2.02184.E2EAA2B5; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 15:42:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w5KJgaN7010388; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 15:42:37 -0400
Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w5KJgVDH028710 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 20 Jun 2018 15:42:33 -0400
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 14:42:31 -0500
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Cc: 'The IESG' <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis@ietf.org, 'Russ Housley' <housley@vigilsec.com>, lamps-chairs@ietf.org, spasm@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180620194231.GM4946@kduck.kaduk.org>
References: <152952187281.28465.4474916033160303537.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <005801d408cd$c16f9420$444ebc60$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <005801d408cd$c16f9420$444ebc60$@augustcellars.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpileLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hTV1tVbpxVtcOesrsWcfUkWr17cZLeY 8Wcis8Xq6d/ZLC7PXctmMe9asgObx8Y509k8liz5yeSx6s4X1gDmKC6blNSczLLUIn27BK6M jr7rTAUbuSt6vvWzNTD+4uhi5OSQEDCR6H3ewtTFyMUhJLCYSWLzy1+sEM5GRonfB7+zgVQJ CVxlkvh2zhzEZhFQlfi8dhpYnE1ARaKh+zIziC0ioC6xdfVNsEnMAisZJZbt2sYOkhAWCJNY 1/0MrIFXwFji1ek2VoihzYwSE5bmQ8QFJU7OfMICYjMLaEnc+PcSaBAHkC0tsfwf2KWcAg4S 1xsh7hEVUJbY23eIfQKjwCwk3bOQdM9C6F7AyLyKUTYlt0o3NzEzpzg1Wbc4OTEvL7VI11gv N7NELzWldBMjOKgl+XYwTmrwPsQowMGoxMN7I0wrWog1say4MvcQoyQHk5IoL38NUIgvKT+l MiOxOCO+qDQntfgQowQHs5II75rZQDnelMTKqtSifJiUNAeLkjhv9iLGaCGB9MSS1OzU1ILU IpisDAeHkgTv9zVAjYJFqempFWmZOSUIaSYOTpDhPEDDudaCDC8uSMwtzkyHyJ9iVJQS52UE SQiAJDJK8+B6QUlHInt/zStGcaBXhHkdQKp4gAkLrvsV0GAmoMHVzWCDSxIRUlINjGXNGdXe cnxVW7ZP2fj7/nyGK/c/rp8YuuC1wD7thjWzBHjERVlfKGg+cAr8fWhezLdtfKeTFdv8r6X7 PH7oEbrL8Zz4r56nSd8mzmSatqHlwV+DCaLrvh91r0rQ3epnYFAUvCZ38j93kf0WV5L0fx/4 UV9geXqbxr3DpVMT9pd4BUyO3cqQ+UaJpTgj0VCLuag4EQDMPx/BFQMAAA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/it0zylS70CkKOKidFsdMVIfjfOg>
Subject: Re: [lamps] Benjamin Kaduk's Yes on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 19:42:43 -0000

Trimming the easily resolved bits...

On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:34:46PM -0700, Jim Schaad wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 12:11 PM
> > To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> > Cc: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis@ietf.org; Russ Housley
> > <housley@vigilsec.com>; lamps-chairs@ietf.org; housley@vigilsec.com;
> > spasm@ietf.org
> > Subject: Benjamin Kaduk's Yes on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-06: (with
> > COMMENT)
> > 
> > 
> > Section 4.3
> > 
> > Why are we going from SHOULD+ (in RFC 5750) to just SHOULD for RSASSA-
> > PSS with SHA-256?
> 
> Big long discussion on this, but mostly because EdDSA has overtaken RSASSA-PSS in the mind share of the world.

Maybe we could have a little text in Appendix A, then?

> 
> > 
> >    [...] Other extensions may be included, but those extensions
> >    SHOULD NOT be marked as critical.
> > 
> > Is this a candidate for a 2119 MAY?
> 
> No not really, marking things a critical is a hinderance to interoperability rather than promoting it.  The selection of SHOULD NOT rather than MAY indicates this by saying that if you want to do this you should probably reconsider that decision unless you have a really good case to do so.

Whoops, I was talking about "MAY be included", not the "SHOULD NOT be
marked as critical".  But I could go either way; it's kind of a statement
of fact.

-Benjamin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email