IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Tls-reg-review] Early code points for ECH

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Tue, 26 May 2020 22:22 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: tls-reg-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls-reg-review@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53BE03A0ACD; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:22:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 WpQmzbt0uCS3; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (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 B1B513A0AC1; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 04QMLtES023260 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 26 May 2020 18:21:58 -0400
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 15:21:55 -0700
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Christopher Wood <caw@heapingbits.net>
Cc: TLS Chairs <tls-chairs@ietf.org>, "tls-reg-review@ietf.org" <tls-reg-review@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20200526222155.GV58497@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <f8a52d53-9eee-4545-8e51-239a1113d7ca@www.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f8a52d53-9eee-4545-8e51-239a1113d7ca@www.fastmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls-reg-review/-gt0xBEIyrVSI5VsqzsOw-y8Yx0>
Subject: Re: [Tls-reg-review] Early code points for ECH
X-BeenThere: tls-reg-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TLS REVIEW <tls-reg-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls-reg-review>, <mailto:tls-reg-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls-reg-review/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls-reg-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-reg-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls-reg-review>, <mailto:tls-reg-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 22:22:04 -0000

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 02:44:25PM -0700, Christopher Wood wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I'd like to kick off the early codepoint allocation process for ECH. We have two extensions that need codepoints. Based on the existing registry, I chose the next two unassigned values and proposed them in this PR:

Not really relevant to the current request, but I wonder whether the
experts have opinions on sequential allocation vs. random allocation.

-Ben

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email