IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-psk-new-mac-aes-gcm-03.txt

"Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey@cisco.com> Wed, 22 October 2008 23:46 UTC

Return-Path: <tls-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tls-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tls-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 908DE3A6B63; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:46:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C33E3A6B63 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:46:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.128
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.128 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.171, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DOoiKXaM8eaW for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:46:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9A5E3A6951 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:46:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,467,1220227200"; d="scan'208";a="94843788"
Received: from sj-dkim-2.cisco.com ([171.71.179.186]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Oct 2008 23:47:47 +0000
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m9MNllOg024638; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:47:47 -0700
Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m9MNllAA009707; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:47:47 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.38]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:47:47 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:47:46 -0700
Message-ID: <AC1CFD94F59A264488DC2BEC3E890DE506BE1CCB@xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <200810201401.QAA25056@TR-Sys.de>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-psk-new-mac-aes-gcm-03.txt
Thread-Index: AckyvIzcddzn2aMyQZSnlkHyJOMfqwB4uNKw
References: <200810201401.QAA25056@TR-Sys.de>
From: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey@cisco.com>
To: Alfred HÎnes <ah@tr-sys.de>, tls@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Oct 2008 23:47:47.0402 (UTC) FILETIME=[96132AA0:01C934A0]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1647; t=1224719267; x=1225583267; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim2002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jsalowey@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Joseph=20Salowey=20(jsalowey)=22=20<jsalowey@ci sco.com> |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[TLS]=20WGLC=20for=20draft-ietf-tls-psk -new-mac-aes-gcm-03.txt |Sender:=20; bh=rZH2Y0O+u/Z3osrwzKD5QCHaZYMUkTAiYVz2eHjn3sk=; b=qeKUpeCOWqFB5CoXv1SykJrlrwmBADU2uoIP+9uO7dozfwft+v3E42jaah s3YE11ykSb5wvnVYccUFRlRikQW+1tz5OwU6KiH/NC93VI9QqOFsFETqL2Yp 7l+NJD+xCa;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-2; header.From=jsalowey@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim2002 verified; );
Subject: Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-psk-new-mac-aes-gcm-03.txt
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tls-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tls-bounces@ietf.org

 
> Pasi:
> Do you have specific use cases in mind that could justify that?
> 
> All:
> Or is the perceived view of WG policy wrong, and consistency 
> with RFC 5289 less important than extended utility?
> 
> My proposal:
> 
> It might make sense to now leave the draft "as is" and defer 
> the final decision on this amendment until comments from IETF 
> LC have been received and can be considered as well.
> Documenting the question in the PROTO Writeup could direct 
> the community at large to consider this topic during LC, and 
> doing so thus would be a good chance to see if someone 
> explicitely calls for the addition if this feature.
>
[Joe] Since there has been no more discussion, this is the approach I will take with Proto write-up and submission to the IESG. 

My personal opinion is that we should keep the draft as it is.  I don't see a glaring need for TLS 1.1 compatibility.  As a minor point of consistency I think the new long MACs should use the TLS 1.2 PRF.  



 
> Kind regards,
>   Alfred.
> 
> -- 
> 
> +------------------------+------------------------------------
> --------+
> | TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., 
> Dipl.-Phys.  |
> | Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18 
>         |
> | D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  ah@TR-Sys.de             
>         |
> +------------------------+------------------------------------
> --------+
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email