Re: [TLS] Brief Cross-WG review - draft-ietf-mmusic-comedia-tls

Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com> writes:

>> 
>> > One other question -- in the IESG review, the issue was raised that
>> > there's not currently an IANA registry for textual names of hash
>> > functions.  I agreed to add an IANA considerations section for this
>> > purpose, but I was wondering if there's interest in having this
>> > registry be more broadly scoped than just for comedia-tls?
>> 
>> Well, as far as TLS goes, we only use integer code points, so this
>> wouldn't buy us anything, but speaking personally I think this
>> would be a good idea.
>
> Ekr,
>
> I somehow missed Jonathan's original question about this.  I'll support
> making this registry broad-based as long as we don't have to troubleshoot
> it a lot from the security side.  Essentially this is going to be
> an IANA space for SDP-folk determined names of the algorithms
> from RFCs 3280 and 4055 (and later, any RFCs which update 4055).
>
> The reason I don't want to use the broad registry if it entails
> debugging is that it's not very likely to be in the consciousness of 
> future security developers, not being integrated into a reference
> security RFC, and there's not much precedent (if any) for using
> the same registry for multiple protocols.  

OK, well I don't have a strong feeling either way, so this is
probably a question for SAAG or the SEC ADs.

-Ekr

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls