Re: [TLS] WG adoption of draft-sandj-tls-iana-registry-updates-01

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 03 November 2016 02:25 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 365CB129577 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 19:25:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G1CFfgU-Wtim for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 19:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E19AF1298B3 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Nov 2016 19:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id B24F5BE56 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 02:25:53 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mhJEE4zpB9gt for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 02:25:51 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.87.48.210] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53EDDBE55 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 02:25:51 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1478139951; bh=t+culwqucyAroZ0WkQ91cW3JzfKuzKOJ8rtrIWZITSY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=vCuBQy2+utYa75HRWXRtwObdE2ma/rZvVn+gixAoYL1fNL/yzLx0xK3X1HPjhVAFn NhiANuMavz4c/gBoT7zxK3V6TAhFA23ZlGdRTJB1+8KTTjTwKy6gyvw2oNBmjGXWDF keLTZ4u204GqeisZD82TIgxd2ar+r1w/VwGt7dsI=
To: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
References: <26941608-3cb4-2625-cd07-f2a1953fc394@cs.tcd.ie>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <21f3fe7d-1fe7-18c8-2e48-8bf4b54d3c0c@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 02:25:51 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <26941608-3cb4-2625-cd07-f2a1953fc394@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="------------ms070107020302000608080903"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/v2dlB-CWZUl8OSmqSWpwGSl3SOs>
Subject: Re: [TLS] WG adoption of draft-sandj-tls-iana-registry-updates-01
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 02:25:58 -0000

Looks to me like this is fine to go ahead. So Sean
and Joe, please submit a draft-ietf-tls- version of
this I-D.

Thanks,
S

On 22/10/16 15:30, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Sean and Joe wrote up this IANA registry draft as per
> discussions at WG meetings and on the list. As they've
> done the initial work, but are WG chairs, they wanted
> me (as responsible AD) to call consensus for it. (They
> wrote this up as finding authors for such fairly boring
> stuff was hard - thank them for taking one for us all
> when you see 'em:-)
> 
> Based on the earlier discussions and limited mails on
> this draft, I do think there's consensus to adopt this
> approach and that the text in the I-D [1] is a good
> enough starting point for the WG.
> 
> If you think otherwise, please comment to the list in
> the next week.
> 
> If you've questions about all this from a process-crap
> POV, feel free to ask those on or off the list as you
> think appropriate;-)
> 
> Note that if this is adopted as a WG item, the chairs
> might decide to continue as editors or recruit someone
> else. In the former case, I'm fine with doing the WGLC
> stuff when this is ready (which it nearly is IMO, so
> there may or may not be a need for new authors, depends
> on what the WG think of the text I'd guess).
> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
> 
> 
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sandj-tls-iana-registry-updates-01
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>