IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Editorial: chronological order in ECH draft

Carrick Bartle <cbartle891@icloud.com> Thu, 24 June 2021 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <cbartle891@icloud.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B00E63A2BA5 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=icloud.com
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 TKJx1TSCn1ML for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mr85p00im-zteg06022001.me.com (mr85p00im-zteg06022001.me.com [17.58.23.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E10BB3A2BA6 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=icloud.com; s=1a1hai; t=1624569670; bh=6XN1C9ChU0VjpWnt+EXFVrhIZaf/Gol1zeIsq7GRQHY=; h=From:Message-Id:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:To; b=iDIkMtigouKAq295PNViQ5xee6BJliepYAnxADAvffx1w7pHcLhdycUbHO3T775ow sTr+Sl6a9XoMWrahkzd0gYhe9M6ylsVeROcIt6U3R4Q+viNW3x9dFHT1dvDHNZI1pN VOC9mNdEmpIXy4sJ/i2W2ryV8TBRpfubtcwUvdvNUMpfV2P7y+QKUWnAr0ehiDhoR4 zTjql07EralUueoxaNahv0U8/hbUZ8Gs8hGhT7XxGeT1E067ujuYp0Krv/PmQRu2pG bwGZsdPmLwCit9n9hIy3WMpKYPuE6LK0Il/6cFBcbympRXfWH4MScPQnZ0J1f3HKPC sZiETkLQztC0w==
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [17.234.91.23]) by mr85p00im-zteg06022001.me.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0C2B33806B2; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 21:21:09 +0000 (UTC)
From: Carrick Bartle <cbartle891@icloud.com>
Message-Id: <E3E22F1A-DFE6-4BBC-B800-7999BE4C988B@icloud.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_791C1707-67E8-4732-9FFB-7194910F5D9D"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.80.0.2.43\))
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:21:09 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAG2Zi20qaiPOtVJuU_L7zckiEqaFhe6P5dWYE_boikCH8zNjAg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
To: Christopher Patton <cpatton=40cloudflare.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <363384B1-7CB7-45FC-9FDF-7F8D08B80E81@icloud.com> <1b905089-d3c0-4cce-89d7-658c682a47af@www.fastmail.com> <e55e0e94-4c9c-edd4-4333-ff9e23af6aee@cs.tcd.ie> <CAG2Zi20qaiPOtVJuU_L7zckiEqaFhe6P5dWYE_boikCH8zNjAg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.80.0.2.43)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=1.1.170-22c6f66c430a71ce266a39bfe25bc2903e8d5c8f:6.0.391,18.0.790,17.0.607.475.0000000 definitions=2021-06-24_16:2021-06-24_01,2021-06-24_16,2020-04-07_01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2106240118
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/JJz3p7gDpAsXE8eEc47St1ii8ng>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Editorial: chronological order in ECH draft
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 21:21:17 -0000

Thanks for the feedback, all!

> On Jun 23, 2021, at 4:50 PM, Christopher Patton <cpatton=40cloudflare.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> +1 to new readers! I think a chronological description would be a good starting point, though like MT, I suspect there would be rearranging to do afterwards that would break with a strictly chronological description.
> 
> Chris P.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 4:48 PM Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie <mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 24/06/2021 00:37, Martin Thomson wrote:
> > Whatever you can do to improve the readability of this document would
> > be greatly appreciated. 
> 
> +1 though I have to admit I've really been mostly looking
> at diffs at this stage - probably some new readers/coders
> are needed,
> 
> S.
> 
> > It's a complicated design and I always spend
> > far too much time trying to find answers to my questions.  A better
> > structure would be appreciated.
> > 
> > I do find that questions aren't always about behaviour.  They are
> > also about protocol elements, and those a scattered piecemeal
> > throughout.  So I would be disappointed if any restructuring were
> > limited to just getting the time sequence straightened out.
> > 
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021, at 09:04, Carrick Bartle wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> I'm bringing
> >> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/issues/412 <https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/issues/412> to the list
> >> since it looks like we're (hopefully) getting close to the end game
> >> with ECH.
> >> 
> >> The ECH draft is currently organized such that it describes all
> >> client behavior and then all server behavior. Personally, I find
> >> this very confusing to follow, and I'm constantly having to flip
> >> back and forth between sections (which themselves constantly refer
> >> to each other). Does anyone object to my rearranging the content to
> >> be in more of the order in which things occur rather than being
> >> divided into client and server sections? Of course, depending on
> >> how I do it, it could end up being *more* confusing, but I just
> >> wanted to see if people were opposed to it in principle.
> >> 
> >> Carrick _______________________________________________ TLS mailing
> >> list TLS@ietf.org <mailto:TLS@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>
> >> 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list 
> > TLS@ietf.org <mailto:TLS@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org <mailto:TLS@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email