[Tls-reg-review] [IANA #1152216] Request for Assignment (tls-parameters, draft-yang-tls-tls13-sm-suites)

"Amanda Baber via RT" <iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org> Wed, 18 September 2019 22:18 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 []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25A981200C7 for <tls-reg-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.177
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.177 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BHIuUsIqUI8b for <tls-reg-review@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp01.icann.org (smtp01.icann.org []) (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 293A112002F for <tls-reg-review@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:18:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from request4.lax.icann.org (request1.lax.icann.org []) by smtp01.icann.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF40E0382; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 22:18:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by request4.lax.icann.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id EBB872014D; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 22:18:24 +0000 (UTC)
RT-Owner: amanda.baber
From: "Amanda Baber via RT" <iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org>
Reply-To: iana-prot-param-comment@iana.org
In-Reply-To: <2v3cxr80dc-1@ppa4.dc.icann.org>
References: <RT-Ticket-1152216@icann.org> <2v3cxr80dc-1@ppa4.dc.icann.org>
Message-ID: <rt-4.4.3-23168-1568845104-1675.1152216-9-0@icann.org>
X-RT-Loop-Prevention: IANA
X-RT-Ticket: IANA #1152216
X-Managed-BY: RT 4.4.3 (http://www.bestpractical.com/rt/)
X-RT-Originator: amanda.baber@icann.org
CC: rsalz@akamai.com, ynir.ietf@gmail.com, nick@cloudflare.com, tls-reg-review@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-RT-Original-Encoding: utf-8
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 22:18:24 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls-reg-review/ZYRZ3h1ds19ktFc3ka458AVJpSU>
Subject: [Tls-reg-review] [IANA #1152216] Request for Assignment (tls-parameters, draft-yang-tls-tls13-sm-suites)
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: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 22:18:27 -0000

Hi Rich, all,

As it appears that Yoav and Rich have both approved these registrations on the mailing list, should we move ahead with these registrations, with the additional information proposed by Rich? Specifically:


Looking at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yang-tls-tls13-sm-suites-00, the IANA considerations in particular, I suggest the following:

             | Value | Description     | DTLS-OK | Reference |
             |  TBD1 | TLS_SM4_GCM_SM3 | No      | this RFC  |
             |       |                 |         |           |
             |  TBD2 | TLS_SM4_CCM_SM3 | No      | this RFC  |
Update the TLS Cipher Suites table to include
TBD1 is 0x00,0xC6
TBD2 is 0x00,0xC7
Note to the draft authors: This table is missing the “Recommended” column.  It should be filled in with “N”

               | Value | Description | DTLS-OK | Reference |
               |  TBD3 | sm2sig_sm3  | No      | this RFC  |
TBD3 is 0x0708
Note to the draft authors: This table is missing the “Recommended” column. It should be filled in with “N”

        | Value | Description | DTLS-OK | Recommended | Reference |
        |  TBD4 | curveSM2    | No      | No          | this RFC  |
TBD4 is 224
Note to the draft authors: This table should NOT have the “Recommended” column.


I saw that the requester was asked to contact us, but our understanding from RFC 8447 is that registration requests should actually be sent to us by the reviewers (upon approval) rather than the requesters. We do need to contact the list when a draft is up for IESG Approval, if the registrations in the document are still pending expert approval.


On Wed Sep 18 05:12:47 2019, kaishen.yy@antfin.com wrote:
> Contact Name:
> Paul Yang
> Contact Email:
> kaishen.yy@antfin.com
> Type of Assignment:
> I request to assign a set of TLS parameters including two TLS cipher
> suites, one signature scheme and one supported group entry.
> Registry:
> Those numbers are assigned in "TLS Cipher Suites", "TLS Supported
> Groups" and "TLS SignatureScheme" registries.
> Description:
> We are trying to standardize the use of Chinese SM algorithms into
> TLSv1.3 and we also need to have an early implementation of the draft
> for a validation purpose, so we need to get those numbers assigned by
> Additional Info:
> The I-D has been submitted to: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yang-
> tls-tls13-sm-suites-00