[Tls-reg-review] [IANA #1158450] spelling change request in TLS Certificate Types registry

"Amanda Baber via RT" <iana-matrix@iana.org> Sat, 21 December 2019 02:36 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 B25A4120A03; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:36:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.95
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.95 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 aaX-hRzogtnR; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:36:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp01.icann.org (smtp01.icann.org [192.0.33.81]) (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 8CFEB1209FE; Fri, 20 Dec 2019 18:36:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from request4.lax.icann.org (request1.lax.icann.org [10.32.11.221]) by smtp01.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75F67E0D38; Sat, 21 Dec 2019 02:36:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by request4.lax.icann.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 6E38C20551; Sat, 21 Dec 2019 02:36:22 +0000 (UTC)
RT-Owner: amanda.baber
From: "Amanda Baber via RT" <iana-matrix@iana.org>
Reply-To: iana-matrix@iana.org
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLJYGnOKfK2JFg7t+b4NBkCX7irBgCYFyyDzZ9bbLZgOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <RT-Ticket-1158450@icann.org> <20191214014601.GM81833@kduck.mit.edu> <CALaySJLJYGnOKfK2JFg7t+b4NBkCX7irBgCYFyyDzZ9bbLZgOw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <rt-4.4.3-12846-1576895782-1482.1158450-37-0@icann.org>
X-RT-Loop-Prevention: IANA
X-RT-Ticket: IANA #1158450
X-Managed-BY: RT 4.4.3 (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/)
X-RT-Originator: amanda.baber@icann.org
To: barryleiba@computer.org, kaduk@mit.edu, rsalz@akamai.com
CC: tls-reg-review@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, ekr@rtfm.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-RT-Original-Encoding: utf-8
Precedence: bulk
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 02:36:22 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls-reg-review/UwErUW_Ll9pA_6qwUa5yE-5MMSs>
Subject: [Tls-reg-review] [IANA #1158450] spelling change request in TLS Certificate Types registry
X-BeenThere: tls-reg-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sat, 21 Dec 2019 02:36:24 -0000

Hi,

We'll wait for the verified errata report and keep this ticket open in the meantime. 

thanks,
Amanda

On Sat Dec 14 14:48:53 2019, barryleiba@computer.org wrote:
> No-brainer here, yes.  Process-wise, for completeness, I think we
> should consider this to be an erratum in 8446, in that it neglected to
> include an IANA action for this.  I think it makes sense to submit an
> errata report to add it, mark that report as "verified", and ask IANA
> to make the change.
> 
> Barry
> 
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 8:46 PM Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > RFC 8446 deliberately changed the spelling for the TLS Certificate
> > type
> > assigned value 0 (listed at
> > https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values/tls-
> > extensiontype-values.xhtml#tls-extensiontype-values-3),
> > from "X.509" to "X509" (no dot).  This was done to improve the
> > compatibility of the protocol description language with automated
> > processing tools.  Since the name is not a protocol constant and
> > merely a
> > descriptive mnemonic, I propose that we update the name listed in the
> > registry accordingly.  Adding [RFC8446] as a reference at the same
> > time
> > also seems plausible.  Comments welcome!
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ben
> >