IETF Logo Mail Archive

[TLS] Re: Adoption call for TLS 1.2 Update for Long-term Support

Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 20 November 2024 17:57 UTC

Return-Path: <yaronf.ietf@gmail.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 D38AEC14EB19 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:57:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.004
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.004 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dLdSIDZDR7ER for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:57:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32e.google.com (mail-wm1-x32e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE87DC14F6E3 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:57:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-43161e7bb25so59429375e9.2 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:57:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1732125448; x=1732730248; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:to:references:message-id:in-reply-to :thread-topic:subject:from:date:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=oZiAkTqR+6HvE6d9WIwhcuSGNOZeoyMDoD2slE435+U=; b=KUGGmPOij++MqiG01/oLlAn5Z/EUutqoBpq9vjSdRbZExgVsUFbKIlo9neZ0zuxd8J /Fvbd8xjELwEKvVpKZ3SOJNgZsd8NO+I+ChmcRucP9BpzftBWRnkylNFAD55sx6fn6Mo jd5ByHmRd+ZeQszFaNpTI9LP+VB2lQSTc2/lnD1WJpxS9wzGZn8wnHro7BvIPlyuRFrh MSjPlYgXZ2sDuNH+EAPCjlC3mUHDID4hSMc8eUsKgqsjPDdRld3z1qWgqP9McFrkT0F0 Xc3nrrqal4VEJqACP3xCOVDerVAt44mFQddjGZS+BvTZikoNIgngoOMypVKQvyiVs7x7 dKXg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1732125448; x=1732730248; h=content-transfer-encoding:to:references:message-id:in-reply-to :thread-topic:subject:from:date:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oZiAkTqR+6HvE6d9WIwhcuSGNOZeoyMDoD2slE435+U=; b=t9ASttHcG9QLkJNTa5BqqYChl+YmtMmDPFlyjqyQmxkQ+03/Hh/BfX35DRWp/u4jE/ sIAFMW+CTAxAyRnbgMLY72pVcEgw6dMGRv/teNWBcDUbqEY3wqFni/sFD1oqLQH9WKkZ wxT6ilniRIDnOabPMj1DdE9mDMyc+fyyVp0c5xzJo0MSzQ4MTjHMozb8o6ZJ5uT3fCKm nkTkwBho2nusDWrtXgehKeDJY5JL0i7oQjYMHw/Jp2WpWpWJQyyCKhuiBl8HVKWjwisY IJR6BKX3Zr2mSM1BklE4dx4sWduc383tY80Bx6lc6sPtL88pOlcRDEyEQkyTFM2tvQw9 kEeg==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXQ+8jIAxwVI/+6xmbVqUtthW8p/n9itUE7/We/AtHxBugNoU41Mtp5RjYmiwI+ictyD/Q=@ietf.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzCJCqPi2+5zEYyTYJyldw66tbyaEO6ozdgvwQs9A/F6h8NZ68x QiThQeC2JKhY7nFnu8fx1Z9ejgaRYtjOVoRajs66xUNF4UgYSsjC
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF6XI0v/tzUAen3zBG8UXnDY8YF4uZXjkTYx2kE+0RiF3M43E+lGc1ypIF6dtvGSXAyVs9dFA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1c01:b0:42f:8287:c24d with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4334f01840fmr30802085e9.21.1732125447599; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:57:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from macos-F7LQR2FV6V (IGLD-84-229-146-74.inter.net.il. [84.229.146.74]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-433b45f6b78sm27801675e9.12.2024.11.20.09.57.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:57:27 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 19:57:23 +0100
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] Re: Adoption call for TLS 1.2 Update for Long-term Support
In-Reply-To: <CWXP265MB5153A14B88F7E5CC94E9BF9AC2212@CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Message-ID: <67DD955A-3D13-E04F-9398-F5B37786F79A@hxcore.ol>
References: <278163DF-0CB8-472F-84CB-0B8236FEC7C1@sn3rd.com> <231D5F24-E1AE-4F7C-9860-F6B0FF79D6FF@akamai.com>,<CWXP265MB5153A14B88F7E5CC94E9BF9AC2212@CWXP265MB5153.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
To: Andrew Campling <andrew.campling@419.consulting>, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, TLS List <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Message-ID-Hash: ZGIXMW5CU5HCT22BH7D5JKMTEJ7O6XX4
X-Message-ID-Hash: ZGIXMW5CU5HCT22BH7D5JKMTEJ7O6XX4
X-MailFrom: yaronf.ietf@gmail.com
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
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [TLS] Re: Adoption call for TLS 1.2 Update for Long-term Support
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/dIHxUFuPdNOA0acdArk6JLCriyQ>
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>

-1. The TLS working group, and this document in particular, has consistently ignored the products of the UTA working group. Specifically, RFC 9325 [1] published a mere two years ago is not even referenced in the draft, let alone a comparison made with these deployment recommendations that were made by the very same IETF. (Yes you can hear my frustration coming through).

 

Thanks,

                Yaron

 

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9325/" rel="nofollow">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9325/

 

 

On 20/11/2024, 19:27, "Andrew Campling" <andrew.campling@419.consulting> wrote:

+1, especially given the previous discussion on this topic on the list back in 2016.

 

 

Andrew

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com>

Sent: 05 November 2024 19:01

To: Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>; TLS List <tls@ietf.org>

Subject: [TLS] Re: Adoption call for TLS 1.2 Update for Long-term Support

 

I strongly support adoption.

 

I do not understand why anyone would be opposed to the IETF making deployment recommendations. I can understand why someone might be bothered by the impliciation that *THIS ONE WAY* is the only way to get long-term support, especially if it's seen to contradict our encouragement of TLS 1.3. But that is an editorial issue that can be easily fixed.

 

I would like to see this adopted, a short change cycle, and then advanced in the same cluster with our TLS 1.2 is frozen document.

 

 

_______________________________________________

TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org

To unsubscribe send an email to tls-leave@ietf.org

 

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status