Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

nalini elkins <nalini.elkins@e-dco.com> Tue, 13 March 2018 16:51 UTC

Return-Path: <nalini.elkins@e-dco.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 1241C127419 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=e-dco-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 778wFQaWITpD for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x233.google.com (mail-it0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5103F124D37 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x233.google.com with SMTP id k135-v6so951691ite.2 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=e-dco-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZZk5THgruXFglpJg8pgABLudkNKFLM2xM6f9L6K7Qak=; b=cv8vBMmKeVUF/wa7osYjr4ZnaaT9Lw3nYF2R7JsKb+Z5pVqTDTRyzAGZJPzYZHW+M9 +bMQBK8OIdTpoEGrV3HQaGvVOVqOCWucX+pswSrfkaxoTLC7k4CZ8mzdU9VW9TmgBmV8 kzwvqtMOa8yPJis8mKU8d2zYe4D2Bk3zNa0hlLJuVpihBMdhrvozMaFFSL6MY0CH0UMO R7Y2hI4cb/ZPuS6lbQH1d0jvr1QlZIhLK5UW2F8AZ0yTdQSbaNYwC6qbxo2CJ1C+y4Ov Tri2GnOYlE99Ou6N3MclaZRUcqigC5jrZ+BgvjSLpoPCy98o49MsVHMUm4pSpGJCmM0y wIww==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZZk5THgruXFglpJg8pgABLudkNKFLM2xM6f9L6K7Qak=; b=tettvHbQaRKT3ABSvLwWnVmGRGk4rmENFqQamdxyKrzJ7A+xhC6bfZxfCz62S66ot2 npa5oCJ8a4qcC/tOvgjtBcPrXEwpccSllvAxZ3rK80Xqxvj7Lf6E7g3iVUrP+vFFExQW JpbMWoz0NEko2jsGI+35LCU5MG+sqgJiqlixreLqlidxM1Cs/At17/R2VQx2jGYhrC+a OYpFg/Z5kenN8BIu10f3D/r4gT6e9TFzxfuabiU+Wfdcv5NPs+bJQ+bapbARBxREYTP0 FoDFT17zbqcIqgFB5BeqnNPjTiVAVBfp/93avX6aFeffgRmxu4Vl1Gc2t2apE/htRY7r r12A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7ENS7ZRqlqxnWpPT8XWW5qOO8Pgp2ld305dOesMPSIyS9l0MQNG 09Zr0ctvxW5iKQT+GNGU1fyoNf6q2fUypZTq9d8JCQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELu5s9w93kZQ6i8ANzAStWhUW/LR/78JmCIyPTSB+P+YRboitX+j4G7qm2iQI3vx7djjxThMklxuii0nUTy+Jbc=
X-Received: by 10.36.211.86 with SMTP id n83mr440867itg.23.1520959862520; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:51:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.2.29.138 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:51:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAPsNn2U_xG28Tumo3oRkQ+6=BHzgv-6YtgNSpwvhdFFRWc7EQQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6140B7A6-A1C7-44BC-9C65-9BE0D5E1B580@sn3rd.com> <986797a7-81b0-7874-5f39-afe83c86635b@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOgPGoBYc7O+qmjM-ptkRkE6mRsOYgc5O7Wu9pm3drFp3TVa6Q@mail.gmail.com> <d7dfdc1a-2c96-fd88-df1b-3167fe0f804b@cs.tcd.ie> <CAHbuEH7E8MhFcMt2GSngSrGxN=6bU6LD49foPC-mdoUZboH_0Q@mail.gmail.com> <1a024320-c674-6f75-ccc4-d27b75e3d017@nomountain.net> <2ed0gc.p5dcxd.31eoyz-qmf@mercury.scss.tcd.ie> <d7ec110f-2a0b-cf97-94a3-eeb5594d8c24@cs.tcd.ie> <CAAF6GDcaG7nousyQ6wotEg4dW8PFuXi=riH2702eZZn2fwfLQw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPsNn2XCNtqZaQM6Bg8uoMZRJE+qQakEwvw8Cn9fBm-5H+Xn_A@mail.gmail.com> <3F8142DE-EADB-4AB9-A204-7D87ACDCD3E3@akamai.com> <CAPsNn2VE_7+rWT0fp9rrVnZrgcY7ORLWTee+kf_Av1dqm4CiDQ@mail.gmail.com> <CB55AABB-8937-4F6B-B5AC-B6F262F08A4F@akamai.com> <CAPsNn2U_xG28Tumo3oRkQ+6=BHzgv-6YtgNSpwvhdFFRWc7EQQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: nalini elkins <nalini.elkins@e-dco.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:51:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPsNn2WmjNpok1YvdE+92G45JbTMKnN_HXHu_NNfpT1-NuAWZQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Colm_MacC=C3=A1rthaigh?= <colm@allcosts.net>, "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11479e5e52d24905674e10e3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/JN4Q8Oak3-YN0Ox-TysibTsAOGU>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
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." <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: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 16:51:08 -0000

Rich,


A clarification:


> Well, I’d be fine with a bunch of point solutions that were only sold and
deployed in an enterprise because, as I said last time, this is too risky
for the public Internet.


What I meant about being fine with is a solution INSIDE the enterprise.
But, we need a STANDARD because we need to have multiple vendors implement
it.  And, if there is a problem, then the vendors will point first to that
non-standard solution as being the possible problem - which it certainly
could be!


We need to be able to solve problems for end users rapidly.  Some of our
members provide services to hundreds of thousands or millions of end users,
so uptime is critical.


Nalini


On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM, nalini elkins <nalini.elkins@e-dco.com>;
wrote:

> *>>* I hope that we can all work together to craft a solution.   We don't
> want fragmentation and multiple DIY solutions.
>
>
>
> > Well, I’d be fine with a bunch of point solutions that were only sold
> and deployed in an enterprise because, as I said last time, this is too
> risky for the public Internet.
>
>
> We would be fine with that also.  We are looking for something only INSIDE
> the enterprise.
>
>
>
> > So then, who is “we”?
>
>
> "We" is a consortium of organizations.   I would say over 50 so far.  They
> operate large data centers.   They are in manufacturing, insurance,
> finance, and others.
>
>
> Nalini
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:32 AM, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com>; wrote:
>
>> *>* I hope that we can all work together to craft a solution.   We don't
>> want fragmentation and multiple DIY solutions.
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, I’d be fine with a bunch of point solutions that were only sold and
>> deployed in an enterprise because, as I said last time, this is too risky
>> for the public Internet.
>>
>>
>>
>> So then, who is “we”? ☺
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Nalini Elkins
> President
> Enterprise Data Center Operators
> www.e-dco.com
>
>


-- 
Thanks,
Nalini Elkins
President
Enterprise Data Center Operators
www.e-dco.com