IETF Logo Mail Archive

[TLS] Re: Complaint to chairs regarding false claim of consensus to issue an RFC for draft-ietf-tls-mldsa

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 05 May 2026 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71287E94E6BD for <tls@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 07:36:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1777991775; bh=WIwiRI7fAC5G8mp4tiN/OhDyqQCk+RoxGEz3kp36JB0=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Cn/UOZhakvNJIJGk7uI/C+DM2GDyPalmclkY+TQ3tjlNXsbVNM6ABcfETfCr8Vo3l 06Ukdf3Y+KQ8WdfQva8jCZ+81+Mcyj2FOMcDqLuMT0THNa54c7XhIW94sGc9tZDfoJ ku2CpOi6KXoYzQO+TTZ4MhhxWGoeKHOYysTwH/Qg=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QWcaUdUF-XJl for <tls@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 07:36:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9ABCDE94E64E for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2026 07:36:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4g91KC1Knvz43J; Tue, 5 May 2026 16:35:59 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1777991759; bh=Q0ZCz5Ac8s2O8xGCywUVDg2UsRRIm1l8GJqqA3YAIc4=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=bG5QdKb7QiYc8urJ6EpR83IMDd9NUU6xmljI3eV0dX3KpZ/NZWAZwOzKDZwBCtzo6 1zbEQ12LDqcie+ZK/0Y9iMRv8l/C4ae2WBngWcTaALSsY5jHLJNzOMSXUzOPgPzTqJ rZwqTshFdWmqG9sZ4Vll2EJ9nCF9axEvmyC87PpY=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UJKkgFmDhhvm; Tue, 5 May 2026 16:35:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 5 May 2026 16:35:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D9AAC18E7F03; Tue, 05 May 2026 10:35:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5AED18E7F02; Tue, 05 May 2026 10:35:56 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 10:35:56 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Jacob Appelbaum <jacob@appelbaum.net>
In-Reply-To: <97642d33-2e18-4742-97c5-d2a98f4f30fd@appelbaum.net>
Message-ID: <03fc87ad-9776-947a-c2c4-c2c7c14df9e4@nohats.ca>
References: <20260429044928.2398455.qmail@cr.yp.to> <97642d33-2e18-4742-97c5-d2a98f4f30fd@appelbaum.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Message-ID-Hash: KO2NAXDN4W53SD3FDP2NOTM3R674OLJ4
X-Message-ID-Hash: KO2NAXDN4W53SD3FDP2NOTM3R674OLJ4
X-MailFrom: paul@nohats.ca
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: dstainton415@gmail.com, Fabiana.DA-PIEVE@ec.europa.eu, ludovic.perret@epita.fr, nic.tuv@gmail.com, tanja@hyperelliptic.org, thomas.bellebaum@aisec.fraunhofer.de, tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [TLS] Re: Complaint to chairs regarding false claim of consensus to issue an RFC for draft-ietf-tls-mldsa
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/_M0rnb6Vagah94JA51bTtASZ5qA>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tls-leave@ietf.org>

On Mon, 4 May 2026, Jacob Appelbaum wrote:

> I am even more surprised that your complaint hasn't been acknowledged, nor 
> has it been released from list moderation in the ~five days since you sent 
> it.

Based on your quoted message, it seems djb once again added this
erroneous and misleading disclaimer to the message. So I am surprised
you are surprised. Also, note that you violated DJB's "no derivative"
clause when your mail client modified djb's content when republishing it.

You should also not be the delivery vehicle for djb's moderated
messages by quoting his message verbatim in a list reply as this also
contains djb's bogus "no derivative" clauses that violate RFC5387.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5387/

For an enourmously detailed response of the IETF community to djb, see:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iesg/appeals/artifact/232
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iesg/appeals/artifact/220
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iesg/appeals/artifact/129
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-statement-on-clarifying-derivative-works-rights/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iab/appeals/artifact/229
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iab/appeals/artifact/228
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iab/appeals/artifact/140

> Moderating your complaint seems plainly and directly related to 
> your views on hybrid cryptography, and to the views of others who were 
> ignored in the consensus call.

It does not. Simply read the above links for context instead of
jumping to conclusions of ill intend of the TLS WG.

I'm not responding to the rest of the message, as it is responding to
quoted text from a message that contains bogus and misleading derivative
rights statements. If that message is posted by the original author
without such restrictions, it can be discussed on its merit.

Paul

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status