Re: [TLS] Additional changes for draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates

Peter Gutmann <> Thu, 22 March 2018 10:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68F2C127873 for <>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 03:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zVLBTTxGuN6D for <>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 03:10:40 -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 9B9E512E854 for <>; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 03:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;;; q=dns/txt; s=mail; t=1521713439; x=1553249439; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=OHMpTy5TKH9Ws/jn6wnqXNHWEevPHONKgwHBCYon3q0=; b=KtMHoSLw8MeyTlC4IZOOeXMzFn3MIRtt8owqfEMP9ZT8fVPWN2XrN7wt njHsd1oKu8n5u2q9v9ZLsk1eqTZbjfEHAEiyLuW4Wbv4Z8yiiQNVcSXvV DDv2BM9EwLqXlwC7+QxywNgI9guTvAYC/1GQjwFlfhOjs0/sFQokLnC96 3LoRO/pJT6wvzX+mUoApxVB4OfsfLqSowo8kiFuDvqNpbt+pRj9Z3SyYU lJZi1xQwEuhM+yhlB160T/I8hY6rqdaaoQPuCgTZ5oOFO2lCj6fnR+pN6 LWsRgXEmsY9JP0cLt1j6ozqgWUfyd/CIUxFxn6lox+7mQAMfHjOHoDvtX A==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,344,1517828400"; d="scan'208";a="5059571"
X-Ironport-Source: - Outgoing - Outgoing
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 22 Mar 2018 23:10:37 +1300
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 23:10:37 +1300
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Thu, 22 Mar 2018 23:10:37 +1300
From: Peter Gutmann <>
To: Sean Turner <>, "<>" <>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] Additional changes for draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates
Thread-Index: AQHTvS9jBtMqcTwdRUebVR6wjsrFa6PbNs8AgADaxiE=
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:10:36 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-NZ
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Additional changes for draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates
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, 22 Mar 2018 10:10:44 -0000

Sean Turner <>; writes:

>I had a quick chat with the iANA folks about the HashAlgorithm and
>SignatureAlgorithm, which we are effectively closing by marking all
>unregistered bits as either reserved or depcreated.  IANA suggested another
>way which is to just close the registry,

This seems a bit of a strange thing to do, if it's going to be closed as soon
as the RFC is published then why have it?  A registry implies you can register
things in it, while this will be just a publication of existing values with no
ability to register new ones.  If it's that then it's a List of Algorithm IDs,
not a Registry.