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

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Thu, 27 May 2021 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.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 49AA33A0A68; Thu, 27 May 2021 10:12:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.434
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.434 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.398, MAY_BE_FORGED=0.846, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=nostrum.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 is9_hgnRZxa2; Thu, 27 May 2021 10:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 181D63A0A92; Thu, 27 May 2021 10:12:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (mta-70-120-133-87.satx.rr.com [70.120.133.87] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 14RHC9sd091028 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 27 May 2021 12:12:10 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1622135530; bh=zZZCuBt6+IKrqnqLHGmC7scsgK8U7Izdz/HucsL9Odg=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=T39JPjh90vyL1jWrYwmn+jp735yiBhImlvw33BeF/BCbDOqvVkLBHkJ4SgBQNAjDX wSQzDtda4xPo060EHkhqeNu1+hem0MahkASFyJ1v4arqnomeI6ohNXpCxVIroa2bBj rVGobUqwbpJsMnOgYkS5JjUD5QH3qD0VYis+60cs=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host mta-70-120-133-87.satx.rr.com [70.120.133.87] (may be forged) claimed to be smtpclient.apple
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <883FF8CA-3B57-4A09-8C3B-193BC2B83CD7@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C5697AAA-E126-4F55-9C37-EA61BACB5FF6"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.100.0.2.22\))
Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 12:12:03 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYvxUQTcCFVKVAS=_HsWrPiUWf=hvsfc4Jo+NYp5wTsAg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Sparks via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>, stir-chairs@ietf.org, IETF STIR Mail List <stir@ietf.org>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
References: <162197342464.31097.13986576482232251508@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwYvxUQTcCFVKVAS=_HsWrPiUWf=hvsfc4Jo+NYp5wTsAg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.100.0.2.22)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stir/fy_bEcwjw85hpIUhC5j-YjApCwc>
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 17:12:19 -0000

(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> 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
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir