[TLS] IANA considerations I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-dtls-heartbeat-01.txt

"t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com> Tue, 01 February 2011 10:46 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17DB3A6C04 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 02:46:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.132
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.433, BAYES_50=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xMUIYhkquwfV for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 02:46:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.btconnect.com (c2beaomr06.btconnect.com [213.123.26.184]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBBD53A6C5B for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 02:46:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from host217-44-202-151.range217-44.btcentralplus.com (HELO pc6) ([217.44.202.151]) by c2beaomr06.btconnect.com with SMTP id BUG32987; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 10:50:01 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <00d001cbc1f4$dcc0e080$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Michael_T=FCxen?= <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
References: <20110127114502.24680.73782.idtracker@localhost><874o8uplm4.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> <09E8BE99-3D69-4693-99DF-2DDD9D48B52B@lurchi.franken.de>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 10:28:37 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0301.4D47E558.0062, actions=TAG
X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2beaomr06.btconnect.com
X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B0207.4D47E55D.014C, ss=1, fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2010-07-22 22:03:31, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=single engine
X-Junkmail-IWF: false
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: [TLS] IANA considerations I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-dtls-heartbeat-01.txt
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/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: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 10:46:50 -0000

Michael

I think that the IANA considerations could do with more work.

Dropping 'Heartbeat Modes' and 'Heartbeat Message Types'
into the IANA website could cause them to be lost for ever.  If they are
specific  to (D)TLS, then I would want to see that in the title, or else
have them subordinate to something that does.

Second, while I like starting with values with one, you leave zero 
open for the next person to use!  I would suggest reserving 
zero and 255 in both registries.

Tom Petch