Re: [TLS] Eric Rescorla's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04: (with COMMENT)

Sean Turner <> Thu, 05 April 2018 01:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B63126B72 for <>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 18:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5W02ohXGMsJi for <>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 18:54:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 980E112D7ED for <>; Wed, 4 Apr 2018 18:54:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id s10-v6so14937472plp.0 for <>; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 18:54:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=8uvGVKDEPgW3tSztk2WYdBnBwDnBZiXj4vLo6g72Pj0=; b=VkVOHl8UU+OY46AtKWEADHDZ4w5sY5R7F8R1WPLFLwwaJ7p3ZaeoNKcHSMAGrUFy1G AgEkfCqeY31Dt2OBfmNhLIoElkR8Virr4qp9atQBotgj5TL+d+v3uD1NHbzGv/I7MJnM myT7FwE6EHxBHrwu+Wa7uKhW4fRKVMya+nYVs=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=8uvGVKDEPgW3tSztk2WYdBnBwDnBZiXj4vLo6g72Pj0=; b=QNJttF3tHDEGCO+uzQkE0zCPWz0OLPs2btwLp4XQv0VwFLPNlqFEbDqVbQAcK54dH5 hjbMr1ZNCmbtxcNgCvOTvERKz3uRj0mgRUogDgDzOA2epbf8R4MajwtY43wdxW7Ll6XX 7lRAkD36TYjfc3xR/hh0PGK2qEK8nNgAtEN7cWT/6a24IZm3bRcdbyXvZx5dKsKn2vkn JwrVATWUb56irrifJBgi5dOyZg9XfVaNGCX5Yqww6x6ZqHexXweeTNIEh6yv3BS8F10s uvjHnhpKCBjXKnZ+jUm5EspquUvZCWjpLjRPmCxAEG0wKChPq7qT6tmJnr74i2Z/f37Z Qncg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GQ12yxqQwtGhPfEGPZjeQRyR0+HdCjqHTH2lB00CcxIo79uN8C H1As7OM/bOPls5Mi/+fqW/YNKw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49yiEqNIrqwtxOUK0gxJ/qDPPueRc8DSh5lhAAB0beeGpTETyM65bk9Rj45LJF8JAKVvmG9Cw==
X-Received: by with SMTP id t13mr9183616pfh.56.1522893288006; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 18:54:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id m23sm13745794pfg.75.2018. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Apr 2018 18:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\))
From: Sean Turner <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:54:39 -0500
Cc: The IESG <>,, Stephen Farrell <>,,
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Eric Rescorla <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.18)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Eric Rescorla's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04: (with COMMENT)
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: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 01:54:51 -0000

> On Mar 31, 2018, at 12:54, Eric Rescorla <> wrote:
> Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04: Yes
> 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
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> requires standards action.  Not all parameters defined in standards
>   track documents need to be marked as recommended.
> It might be useful to capitalize Recommended here.

Here and a couple of other places I capitalized recommended.

>   been through the IETF consensus process, has limited applicability,
>   or is intended only for specific use cases.
> I think technically it has "Recommended = No”

yeah the OPSDIR review noted this as well so I changed the sentence to be:

If an item is not marked as recommended it does …

>   Note:  Supported Groups marked as "Yes" are those allocated via
>      Standards Track RFCs.  Supported Groups marked as "No" are not;
>      supported groups marked "No" range from "good" to "bad" from a
> This may need a revision because some have not been allocated that way.

Supported Groups is the one real odd-ball here because they were originally not on standards track, but 4492bis is going to move them there.  Would this work:

These “Yes” groups are taken from Standards Track RFCs; {{?I-D.ietf-tls-rfc4492bis}} elevates secp256r1 and secp384r1 to Standards Track.

>      thus requiring a new construction.  The exporter interface remains
>      the same, however the value is computed different.
> differently.

PR for the three changes: