Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:55:02 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
Message-ID: <20150916225501.GR13294@localhost>
References: <CAOgPGoBT9C=pWebXShqxhbOsnqK+OZe=-n-SvZ_pH-dAtRaWXQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFewVt7_23v18HpzzDy4ew1h66iNTBOSdP+CVBgc9T-4Z3isfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150916210113.GP13294@localhost>
 <CABcZeBPY6JRnLiqd=-aQQ+8kZGHa3TujSr9+hn1CSt1B_X-r=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFewVt64QphK5=WtAZhN8A7uhjmMZ1wc0nLOKvS8sgTRwY_vkg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAFewVt64QphK5=WtAZhN8A7uhjmMZ1wc0nLOKvS8sgTRwY_vkg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/AB3xFQ5k5wPCpTFXBEuwbmHLP3g>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Call for consensus to remove anonymous DH
Precedence: list

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 02:25:52PM -0700, Brian Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> 
> > In addition, they are already part of TLS, so the question would be if we
> > have
> > consensus to remove them....
> >
> 
> This thread  is about the removal of DH_anon_*, not about raw public keys.

Yes, but you implied that you might not support keeping raw public keys.

I'm not in favor of removing the anon cipher suites if we also remove
raw public key support.  This is important.  I don't want the cost of
doing anon with TLS to escalate piecemeal.  All cards on the table
please.

Nico
--