IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tcpcrypt] v3 of the charter

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Wed, 30 April 2014 23:32 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: tcpcrypt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpcrypt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD4971A6F2C for <tcpcrypt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:32:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
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 zWzl0FVtEAql for <tcpcrypt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu (darkstar.isi.edu [128.9.128.127]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5FCC1A6F28 for <tcpcrypt@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.184.196] ([128.9.184.196]) (authenticated bits=0) by darkstar.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s3UNVC3v026273 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <536187C1.3060009@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:31:13 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ianG <iang@iang.org>, tcpcrypt@ietf.org
References: <536099A0.30900@it.uc3m.es> <23862F2E-9D56-4651-9202-FC676D15720B@netapp.com> <07C2D017-9342-4742-990C-7D3BC795049F@netapp.com> <536157E1.2060202@fifthhorseman.net> <53615A40.9050903@isi.edu> <536165C6.20909@fifthhorseman.net> <536167CC.8010703@isi.edu> <536168FA.2010800@fifthhorseman.net> <53616AD4.6010309@isi.edu> <53616D52.3090504@fifthhorseman.net> <5361824F.8080506@iang.org>
In-Reply-To: <5361824F.8080506@iang.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpcrypt/4HtHbBKujG2oRzqAD9kZfJ0vIek
Subject: Re: [Tcpcrypt] v3 of the charter
X-BeenThere: tcpcrypt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for adding encryption to TCP." <tcpcrypt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpcrypt>, <mailto:tcpcrypt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpcrypt/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpcrypt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpcrypt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpcrypt>, <mailto:tcpcrypt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 23:32:13 -0000

On 4/30/2014 4:07 PM, ianG wrote:
...
> My second instinct would be to wonder if these discussions are arising
> because the charter is still over-specified, too much detail in
> isolation from some real contending protocols.  But that's possibly
> because I think in terms of competition and unexpected benefits.

FWIW, mine too - IMO, the issue of anti-fingerprinting can be specified 
without reference to role, in which case whether simultaneous open is 
supported or not can be determined in a candidate solution.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email