Re: [TLS] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-tls-session-hash-05: (with DISCUSS)

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Sun, 17 May 2015 06:29 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.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 E658E1A8997; Sat, 16 May 2015 23:29:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 s9UTBWl1lo7p; Sat, 16 May 2015 23:29:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x235.google.com (mail-ig0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::235]) (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 E7B9E1A09CF; Sat, 16 May 2015 23:29:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by igcau1 with SMTP id au1so26338019igc.1; Sat, 16 May 2015 23:29:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Ys8ZdDRejM8f1HLVebTGZna8Pd8pdK/7RwYRmmRcFbQ=; b=vdBYVc48GwC3Q3xMVJ/6zg4LUYJkkhjgsG26+InWyaC4T5Mg69Fipka8NIi0pyX4Im alhYXf2sdPR71VvuTW7kkHhnfG/p3Cv+BsbmzWOlJQSfymfqumq6EYFCH+ZBalbTdC5g pvBAmjhUnWqfU54KKx/nvBCl1GPXKM6I0EuMN4Uxxlvhisy/dWEZAhp6XGEWfyeOntkz +mWYWUL247UGnPiLsWdPpqhy9EqdXcjZArE3TvkQyeJ4qEOLetCQq5NU3qCK9YK8Cfep 6SyhZr5P+SLPZ0E3yO26bHCi69BEUgYHo+mCuBFKi7gdgu2KFsM35jIIx57LTSK9LQl4 9mgQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.13.67 with SMTP id f3mr7633697igc.12.1431844184417; Sat, 16 May 2015 23:29:44 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.107.3.195 with HTTP; Sat, 16 May 2015 23:29:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5557827E.7050601@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <20150509225248.21800.83581.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <55546240.3010902@cs.tcd.ie> <FBCB2F18-4975-45EE-9550-5D77450AB5FE@gmail.com> <5557827E.7050601@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 07:29:44 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 6uAV0I7w21V0gTs2ckjrBr-VkPc
Message-ID: <CALaySJJj0x6npwKM2LDGaSptcd2_GMJybErcv30-kMt70v80Bw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0112ccf2fc6de3051641339c
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/2Pqf42qSxSDI9D8sCxumJj8PiyY>
Cc: Karthikeyan Bhargavan <karthik.bhargavan@gmail.com>, "draft-ietf-tls-session-hash@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tls-session-hash@ietf.org>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-tls-session-hash.shepherd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tls-session-hash.shepherd@ietf.org>, "tls-chairs@ietf.org" <tls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-tls-session-hash.ad@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tls-session-hash.ad@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-tls-session-hash-05: (with DISCUSS)
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: Sun, 17 May 2015 06:29:47 -0000

That is a perfect answer, and I will clear my discuss now, and let you all
do the right thing, whatever you decide that is.

Barry

On Saturday, May 16, 2015, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
wrote:

>
> Hiya,
>
> First, I don't think there's much energy for this issue but we
> should get it sorted and move on.
>
> So, how about if we add that this updates 5246 and leave it at that?
>
> The meaning there is that anyone who writes a new implementation
> of 5246 really ought also do this too.
>
> I don't think there's any possible harm to adding that and doing
> so achieves whatever possible good effect there might be from the
> addition of any "Updates" relationship.
>
> If I hear nothing, I'll add an RFC editor note to that effect in
> a few days and hopefully that'll be sufficient for Barry to clear
> his discuss. (Barry, if not, please say what would work.)
>
> Cheers,
> S.
>
> On 14/05/15 09:58, Karthikeyan Bhargavan wrote:
> > The session-hash draft has roughly the same impact as RFC5746, which
> says:
> > "Updates: 5246, 4366, 4347, 4346, 2246"
> >
> > We would be happy to add this list or a subset.
> >
> > Other RFCs affected by the current proposal are: rfc5929, rfc5705,
> rfc5746.
> >
> > Should we note these in any way, other than as Informative References?
> >
> > Best,
> > Karthik
> >
> >
> > On 14 May 2015, at 10:52, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Folks - I note this didn't get an answer. I don't recall that the WG
> >> considered it, and I'm sure if it had the conclusion could have gone
> >> either way (and a random choice would have been fine too:-) but can
> >> you confirm or correct me on that please? If you can do it before the
> >> telechat today (by ~1400 UTC) that'd be great.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> S.
> >>
> >> On 09/05/15 23:52, Barry Leiba wrote:
> >>> Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
> >>> draft-ietf-tls-session-hash-05: Discuss
> >>>
> >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> >>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> >>> introductory paragraph, however.)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Please refer to
> https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> >>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-session-hash/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> DISCUSS:
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> This is a DISCUSS purely because I want to discuss it; whatever the
> >>> result is, I will be clearing the DISCUSS, and not delaying the
> document
> >>> on this point:  The last paragraph of Section 4 makes me wonder whether
> >>> this should "update" 5246.  Basically, while this is an extension
> (which
> >>> wouldn't normally use "updates"), it's one that you're proposing as
> >>> standard behavior, and not really as an extension.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> TLS mailing list
> >>> TLS@ietf.org <javascript:;>
> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
> >>>
> >
>
>