IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Tls-reg-review] [IANA #1260562] Request for Assignment (draft-irtf-cfrg-aegis-aead)

Sabrina Tanamal via RT <iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org> Wed, 09 November 2022 10:35 UTC

Return-Path: <iana-shared@icann.org>
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 25C5BC1522B1 for <tls-reg-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 02:35:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.636
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.636 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JxmYjxBkYipU for <tls-reg-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 02:35:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.lax.icann.org (smtp.lax.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2d0:201::1:81]) (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 969B5C1522D0 for <tls-reg-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 02:35:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from request4.lax.icann.org (request1.lax.icann.org [10.32.11.221]) by smtp.lax.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 622C6E3A2C for <tls-reg-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 10:35:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by request4.lax.icann.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 859DC2092B; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 10:35:21 +0000 (UTC)
RT-Owner: sabrina.tanamal
From: Sabrina Tanamal via RT <iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org>
Reply-To: iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org
In-Reply-To: <3kngcbra5u-1@ppa3.lax.icann.org>
References: <RT-Ticket-1260562@icann.org> <3kngcbra5u-1@ppa3.lax.icann.org>
Message-ID: <rt-4.4.3-24604-1667990121-674.1260562-9-0@icann.org>
X-RT-Loop-Prevention: IANA
X-RT-Ticket: IANA #1260562
X-Managed-BY: RT 4.4.3 (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/)
X-RT-Originator: sabrina.tanamal@icann.org
CC: tls-reg-review@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-RT-Original-Encoding: utf-8
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2022 10:35:21 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls-reg-review/G09WKbPLcShp_xKa7UamUQC4Tn0>
Subject: [Tls-reg-review] [IANA #1260562] Request for Assignment (draft-irtf-cfrg-aegis-aead)
X-BeenThere: tls-reg-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Wed, 09 Nov 2022 10:35:36 -0000

Hi Rich, Yoav, Nick,

We have received a new TLS Cipher Suite request. Please see below. 

If these are OK, which values should we assign? 

Registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters

The deadline for reviews would be November 30th, according to RFC 8447.

Best regards, 

Sabrina Tanamal
Lead IANA Services Specialist

====

Contact Name:
Frank Denis

Contact Email:
fdenis@fastly.com

Type of Assignment:
OIDs for the AEGIS authenticated ciphers

Registry:
TLS registry

Description:
AEGIS is a family of authenticated ciphers that is being standardized. We (Fastly) would like to include it into an experimental TLS stack in order to run measurements.

TLS_AEGIS_256_SHA384 and TLS_AEGIS_128L_SHA256 would be alternatives to TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 and TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256.

So, DTLS-OK and Recommended should be Y as well.

For cipher suites, the description is the cipher suite name as documented in the RFC8446 document.

So, for consistency, in the context of TLS, I guess the AEGIS256 description should be TLS_AEGIS_256_SHA384, and for AEGIS128L: TLS_AEGIS_128L_SHA256.

Additional Info:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-aegis-aead/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email