IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [stir] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-stir-cert-delegation-03: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> Wed, 24 February 2021 02:16 UTC

Return-Path: <rdd@cert.org>
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 7F0CD3A1395; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 18:16:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cert.org
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 OhpD7Hp9htBA; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 18:16:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from veto.sei.cmu.edu (veto.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.17]) (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 89DE73A1394; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 18:16:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from delp.sei.cmu.edu (delp.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.31]) by veto.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 11O2GKr0017082; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 21:16:20 -0500
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 veto.sei.cmu.edu 11O2GKr0017082
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cert.org; s=yc2bmwvrj62m; t=1614132981; bh=c8HUMd8osJtenzvTxktjW/HQzkYYLT/AI76nhPinSa4=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=anupEc+vD6yvEBMM/yLSUTC5bvfyQwmW54DgnCimzDbVCN0hYkl3n+HHZTCPl7j1+ fK0WayroW7nZ/at3NFx25emr3pPOqAsBY3HqmVPN2ICTtSi3RhFSlsnUtcHHbczSi2 e1SAGUZgXC/CPDOPnZpcLvE8NyngJz9vKcYhGPZQ=
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (morris.ad.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.46]) by delp.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 11O2GGoc008441; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 21:16:16 -0500
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.46) by MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu (147.72.252.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2106.2; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 21:16:15 -0500
Received: from MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([fe80::555b:9498:552e:d1bb]) by MORRIS.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([fe80::555b:9498:552e:d1bb%13]) with mapi id 15.01.2106.002; Tue, 23 Feb 2021 21:16:15 -0500
From: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
To: "Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@team.neustar>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-stir-cert-delegation@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-stir-cert-delegation@ietf.org>, "stir-chairs@ietf.org" <stir-chairs@ietf.org>, "stir@ietf.org" <stir@ietf.org>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Thread-Topic: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-stir-cert-delegation-03: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHWhrL7grCfjxUNgESk11Wx4/JT16pmL8eAgAFlv8A=
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 02:16:14 +0000
Message-ID: <a0d8a4dbe60e4257914647e9bbc53aa2@cert.org>
References: <159966061458.21926.1670711388251011329@ietfa.amsl.com> <80FE8E78-90B1-4781-BACC-AEBD781A6F15@team.neustar>
In-Reply-To: <80FE8E78-90B1-4781-BACC-AEBD781A6F15@team.neustar>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.64.202.228]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stir/uIeCwRx84bqD7E9rRY0L5EmPZmM>
Subject: Re: [stir] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-stir-cert-delegation-03: (with COMMENT)
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: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 02:16:25 -0000

Hi Jon!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peterson, Jon <jon.peterson@team.neustar>
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 6:45 PM
> To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> Cc: draft-ietf-stir-cert-delegation@ietf.org; stir-chairs@ietf.org; stir@ietf.org;
> Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
> Subject: Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-stir-cert-delegation-
> 03: (with COMMENT)
> 
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> Thanks for the fixes on this document - there was one comment I left open,
> though...
> 
>     ** Given that this document specifies the delegation model alluded to in
>     Section 5 of RFC8226 with normative guidance, is there a reason it doesn’t
>     formally update RFC8226?
> 
> I'm on the fence about this. I've seen comments that it should update pretty
> much all of RFC8224-6. I think of it more as expanded guidance on the (brief)
> text about delegation in RFC8226, so if it's going to update anything, it should
> probably be that. I'd leave it to the discretion of the IESG, though.

I don't mean to provide a non-answer but we have little consensus on what the Update tag means so I'm not really pressing in any direction beyond asking.  You know the interrelation between the documents better than me and what will best facilitate discovery by those new to this work.  This discovery and not creating confusion is my primary focus.  I trust your judgement on how to make (or not make) the pointer.

Regards,
Roman

> Jon Peterson
> Neustar, Inc.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email