Re: [TLS] Consensus Call on MTI Algorithms

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Thu, 02 April 2015 20:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D88841A1A68 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 Q4qttFnEWctT for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:35:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com (mail-wi0-f181.google.com [209.85.212.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DF641A1A7E for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wiaa2 with SMTP id a2so118825689wia.0 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=s7kzyN/uMZMmU0nvV4C9TNvqno/O1ixs96/IqCxZJTY=; b=gScJOPZH+P6g0/sF9p6OYaqiXhm3jRnUnyZnxRTF2sVg55BOKKwZqpjvxkEGL3LjEv n3THTC0TA3CbeyEIPJz6KSoIT0120HZKWkqhxSwuBCxyBPyc1Yy7eZZ60hqECwUtAnt6 3xTCzReAjWtmulEVdxilIeglts1GIWISHHGL+DjMjdUU1CW7ZGktsUUB/RQTgqmx0PZn JxoZyHz4GHDlUDNM+AVrPIRIQ/3KM5zfVWBf+u6MxJiQUOQTPd9dHGD68wRBmYDe4Vrn 458Wgm+C7ay4mLID+gjoCVcPz1XPqoHHo84R1wqmqScUAOlE/8HoMphULH6CilCkQVI4 cuJA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlA1KAG+oKz7NIhvoFo2Cf36MKOt8R+rg9bYNyd10p0/dPFw2Cf78tEoewrdEloBRIbUmGW
X-Received: by 10.180.21.178 with SMTP id w18mr27477456wie.90.1428006935190; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.27.205.198 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:34:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201504021612.35877.davemgarrett@gmail.com>
References: <CAOgPGoBk+E=cNV1ufBaQ0n7=CJQ34zukPixKCEdpmMLBX=Kg_w@mail.gmail.com> <FDDE70B3-6AB0-4702-A713-70B118CA22C1@gmail.com> <20150402194417.GJ10960@localhost> <201504021612.35877.davemgarrett@gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:34:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBOBZ1gxY+WU5dSDWnOtqCgA7TZUVT=k-ugDAGNOczajuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Garrett <davemgarrett@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bb70a7c1bf4970512c3c6fa
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/1DG-63mYAu9FPM5PlaPc9_CqYQ8>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Consensus Call on MTI Algorithms
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 20:36:02 -0000

Indeed:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dice-profile-10
-Ekr


On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Dave Garrett <davemgarrett@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, April 02, 2015 03:44:18 pm Nico Williams wrote:
> > The answers don't really matter.  Suppose that you are implementing such
> > a library, you don't implement the required algorithms, and that you
> > call the result something like YoavTLS, or FooLangTLS ("TLS for the Foo
> > programming language").  Will the IETF police drag you to the IETF jail
> > for doing that?  No.
>
> Fortunately for you, the IETF police are only armed with water balloons
> made out of an over-engineered rubber that doesn't break on impact, and
> whilst the IETF jail was agreed to be on an island in the middle of nowhere
> that nobody can really get to, it has never been constructed because
> they've been arguing over the color to paint the roof for the past 30
> years. :p
>
> Serious answer: Just write a separate IoT TLS spec that just contains
> modifications for whatever isn't viable because you're creating a system
> not designed to necessarily interoperate with the general Internet. General
> TLS implementations could implement it as well, or not, depending on needs.
>
>
> Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>