IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [stir] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-stir-enhance-rfc8226-02

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Thu, 27 May 2021 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9D023A114B for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 May 2021 11:32:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 8qYF53K5ns1h for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 May 2021 11:32:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D39DF3A1145 for <stir@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 May 2021 11:32:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E19F300BEB for <stir@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 May 2021 14:32:53 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id jKpB5IfKCPBd for <stir@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 May 2021 14:32:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.fios-router.home (pool-141-156-161-153.washdc.fios.verizon.net [141.156.161.153]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 84C043000B9; Thu, 27 May 2021 14:32:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <62FDA890-2A61-418C-874F-AB743ED7EEB1@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D0472969-C96A-41FB-AFD8-BF1D3FB19E1A"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.20\))
Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 14:32:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <D03AAC36-18CE-4EBC-9D52-3D52F06D1108@nostrum.com>
Cc: IETF STIR Mail List <stir@ietf.org>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, stir-chairs@ietf.org, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
References: <162197342464.31097.13986576482232251508@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwYvxUQTcCFVKVAS=_HsWrPiUWf=hvsfc4Jo+NYp5wTsAg@mail.gmail.com> <883FF8CA-3B57-4A09-8C3B-193BC2B83CD7@nostrum.com> <AEF7CD55-3F51-4B09-B266-D17D721891C5@vigilsec.com> <D03AAC36-18CE-4EBC-9D52-3D52F06D1108@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stir/3hskI8FrrDBtDlS5uxzkMv5ukQA>
Subject: Re: [stir] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-stir-enhance-rfc8226-02
X-BeenThere: stir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited <stir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/stir/>
List-Post: <mailto:stir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 18:33:00 -0000

RFC 5280 docs not use quotes.  X.509 uses a different font, but that does not work here.

Russ


> On May 27, 2021, at 2:28 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
> Robert’s separate email points to the existing convention to quote JWT claims. Is there a convention one way or another for X.509 extensions?
> 
> Ben.
> 
>> On May 27, 2021, at 12:57 PM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com <mailto:housley@vigilsec.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Ben:
>> 
>> I did try to follow the conventions in RFC 8226.  That said, I'm happy to hear what might make the sepc easier to understand.
>> 
>> Russ
>> 
>>> On May 27, 2021, at 1:12 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com <mailto:ben@nostrum.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> (dons shepherd hat)
>>> 
>>> The current quote usage seems to follow the convention of RFC 8226. One could argue about whether 8226 did it right, but it is what it is.
>>> 
>>> (I’d argue that “orig” refers to a human-readable-text JWT claim, thus the quotes, while mustInclude refers to an X.509 extension encoded in ASN.1. But that would be just making up stuff.)
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> Ben.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On May 27, 2021, at 11:11 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com <mailto:superuser@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> A brief AD review; I'm going to Last Call this now as my feedback is minor, so please just factor this in as Last Call feedback:
>>>> 
>>>> In Section 3 (and later), stuff like mustInclude and permittedValues aren't quoted, but smaller things like "iat", "orig", and "dest" are.  More generally I found the use or non-use of quotes felt inconsistent.  I don't have a preferred solution, just something to consider.  I don't know what, if anything, the RFC Editor might do if they observe the same.
>>>> 
>>>> -MSK
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 1:10 PM Robert Sparks via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org <mailto:noreply@ietf.org>> wrote:
>>>> Robert Sparks has requested publication of draft-ietf-stir-enhance-rfc8226-02 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the STIR working group.
>>>> 
>>>> Please verify the document's state at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-stir-enhance-rfc8226/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-stir-enhance-rfc8226/>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> stir mailing list
>>>> stir@ietf.org <mailto:stir@ietf.org>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir>
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> stir mailing list
>> stir@ietf.org <mailto:stir@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email