Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

Hi Darin,

I just asked for clarification whether it's on a TLS WG agenda for London.
I'm not quite sure this is a right thread to discuss the contents of that draft.
(In fact, I'm pretty sire it isn't.)

| Artyom Gavrichenkov
| gpg: 2deb 97b1 0a3c 151d b67f 1ee5 00e7 94bc 4d08 9191
| mailto: ximaera@gmail.com
| fb: ximaera
| telegram: xima_era
| skype: xima_era
| tel. no: +7 916 515 49 58

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:39 AM, Darin Pettis <dpp.edco@gmail.com> wrote:
> Artyom,
> Thanks for mentioning the ID and you are right that draft Fenter is the
> supporting problem description.
>
> The reason it was written was to help folks understand why legitimate
> internal out-of-band decryption is still needed on data once it reaches its
> destination and that there isn’t a viable alternative that we are aware of.
> Especially not in-line MitM decryption.  It just doesn’t scale.  The draft
> lists the legitimate internal requirements and speaks to the facts around
> some of the suggestions that have been offered.
>
>  It’s a good read and we are happy to answer questions in advance as needed.
>
> Darin
>
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 4:11 PM Artyom Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sean, Joe,
>>
>> WG also has this at its disposal:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fenter-tls-decryption-00
>> Will that be discussed along with draft-rhrd-tls-tls13-visibility?
>> Those two seem to be rather connected/dependant on each other.
>>
>> | Artyom Gavrichenkov
>> | gpg: 2deb 97b1 0a3c 151d b67f 1ee5 00e7 94bc 4d08 9191
>> | mailto: ximaera@gmail.com
>> | fb: ximaera
>> | telegram: xima_era
>> | skype: xima_era
>> | tel. no: +7 916 515 49 58
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Stephen Farrell
>> <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Sean, Joe,
>> >
>> > On 08/03/18 16:20, Sean Turner wrote:
>> >> I’ve posted the draft agendas:
>> >>
>> >> Monday:
>> >>
>> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/101/materials/agenda-101-tls-sessb
>> >
>> > That includes:
>> > "
>> > TLS Vizability - Russ & Chairs - 30min
>> >  - 10min draft - Russ
>> >   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rhrd-tls-tls13-visibility/
>> >  - 10min discussion - Chairs
>> >  - 10min wrap-up - Chairs
>> > "
>> >
>> > Consider this as an objection to that agenda item
>> > being given any time. I also have some questions
>> > below.
>> >
>> > This topic was discussed at length in Prague with a
>> > very clear lack of consensus to consider any work in
>> > that space, despite there being quite a few fans of
>> > doing such work in the room that day. I don't see
>> > that anything has changed in the meantime.
>> >
>> > Russ' draft was discussed on the list last year, also
>> > with (ISTM) no consensus at all to do any work in
>> > that space. (While you didn't make a consensus call,
>> > am I wrong?) The -01 version is not significantly
>> > different from what was discussed on the list so I
>> > see no need for any presentation nor discussion time.
>> >
>> > Given the above, on what basis are meeting attendees
>> > being asked to waste yet more f2f time on this topic?
>> >
>> > And why is another want-it/hate-it exercise useful?
>> >
>> > As chairs, are you going to continually allow the same
>> > topic to be raised, in the face of a very clear lack
>> > of consensus to do anything in this space? If not,
>> > then what's the plan for ending this?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > S.
>> >
>> > PS: I also strongly object to the "visibility" euphemism,
>> > and while that's partly a comment on the draft, it would
>> > also IMO be a significant error to pose any questions to
>> > the WG based on that euphemism.
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > TLS mailing list
>> > TLS@ietf.org
>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TLS mailing list
>> TLS@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls