[TLS] Kathleen Moriarty's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-rfc4492bis-15: (with COMMENT)

[Kathleen Moriarty <[e-mail]>]

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tls-rfc4492bis-15: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-rfc4492bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for your work on this draft.  I just have one question:

In section 5.10, I see the following text:
   The default hash function is SHA-1 [FIPS.180-2], and sha_size (see
   Section 5.4 and Section 5.8) is 20.  However, an alternative hash
   function, such as one of the new SHA hash functions specified in
FIPS
   180-2 [FIPS.180-2], SHOULD be used instead.

Why are you setting the default to SHA-1 and then recommending that
something else should be used?  Why not just start with a different SHA
hash function as the default or at least for TLS 1.2?  I do see the prior
text about TLS 1.0 and 1.1 using MD5 and SHA-1, but most have recommended
to go right to TLS 1.2 with the SSLv3 deprecation.  As such, I'm not
clear on why the SHA-1 default.