Re: [TLS] Consensus Call on draft-ietf-tls-dnssec-chain-extension

Bill Frantz <> Mon, 16 April 2018 17:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA2A9120721 for <>; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fhwpiNDCIY1o for <>; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2439C127909 for <>; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:29:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (helo=Williams-MacBook-Pro.local) by with esmtpa (Exim 4) (envelope-from <>) id 1f87wO-000AI6-O3; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:29:20 -0400
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:29:20 -0700
From: Bill Frantz <>
To: Nico Williams <>
cc: Jim Fenton <>,
X-Priority: 3
In-Reply-To: <20180416163123.GZ25259@localhost>
Message-ID: <r470Ps-10134i-2ADADCCF80FF4FDABB99B6C9776FD4EC@Williams-MacBook-Pro.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Mailsmith 2.4 (470)
X-ELNK-Trace: 3a5e54fa03f1b3e21aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec7928f5cab986287273752e90c0cbd5b2c4350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Consensus Call on draft-ietf-tls-dnssec-chain-extension
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 17:29:25 -0000

On 4/16/18 at 9:31 AM, (Nico Williams) wrote:

>I wouldn't mind a (C'): a variant of (C) where we get denial of
>existence and a one- or two-byte TTL (one by count of weeks or two-byte
>count of hours) with de minimis text about it, leaving pinning semantics
>to a separate document.  In such a (C') we'd elide all pinning (or most*)
>in this document.

I have always worried about the trust model in PKIX, and thought 
that some form of pinning would an excellent enhancement -- 
modeling how individuals work in the real world:

   Alice, I'd like you to meet Bob. He is an expert in... (Alice 
learns Bob's voice pattern.)

   Bob, this is Alice, I'd like you to... (Alice recognizes 
Bob's voice in the reply.)

I strongly support C or C' as the best way forward, allowing a 
future RFC to address the pinning details. Viktor has some good 
suggestions as well.

Note: I have not been involved in any face-to-face meetings or hums.

Cheers - Bill

Bill Frantz        | When it comes to the world     | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506      | around us, is there any choice | 16345 
Englewood Ave | but to explore? - Lisa Randall | Los Gatos, 
CA 95032