Re: [Trans] Policy for adding to IANA registries requested in 6962-bis

Eran Messeri <> Mon, 12 December 2016 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA70129CB3 for <>; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:55:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.896
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.896, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4raU870Uvmul for <>; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:54:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18687129CB6 for <>; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:54:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id g23so67650837wme.1 for <>; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:54:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=sJoi2U9FjlPMAz0x9Symh6moItFFJknhQwT0l9uW4jw=; b=oqUicNc0xTDqcrjeaAxYdHFHev6P27+xjA+wubHojwh+4pzHOYptYhUVWDSxUEbj/E hAFuNfDjCO33GbsYiSgQD+VqNFFwFhNV2569RGsyN5Z+bnvENxZKaTP1VsaCZaN/Ffbp C+5Kkc+BxS0gVOLMQRVqdCGU0ZN/t2PtOJDer5wg+/OuR939kdTbHrT6kekDeXvo9N2y qhsxt4rGmJhjttTamt4Zj1XI4vHnnUIDXSlOl6ck+lNy7z55Q2jfrIlgyPVpdC6b6tpG sHvpm1ZebtqehUjnjSr6ekqqxMkm+O0aM1ofzdzLyDSxaMxV+yIIhnM++ePZhqtO56SP WSiQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=sJoi2U9FjlPMAz0x9Symh6moItFFJknhQwT0l9uW4jw=; b=emaG7VOKEK7pPDXhN9ouzeaWEHmhf/bqA63uUeAgEOlzSTBQToailqI6qMpa6A7el4 BMzbk1zm0jydaUQlXVy9bh4mlkoQOjyJEnVL57/9bHQAcqNdQP6qqIye5zt8JtWS/yzJ hh2iGJdl8Px2qHhWn392rRyn3AZYRYVKqPFCIHoAK8RiBZpBC8ToR+sPPqtbs3xmuajj MEgtfeaMzc674ENZOzwOyTnqsxVnd3m/YlPPkAudIzzySftbyn+f1j06Nm8mHMx1sWJ1 i2Kd10JiqB7DHNnFV4vo+vDrPzjCwzGRBrbhSBc1LeWicNdtF93fVpKt/pdkOn1/HHMR IU0A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00N2uXWuCUD7KOkk6jnCoylwO81lHWoQK/va6Fo8oJbjkR7z2UrcjSW0GInz68D2/XMx1rU3TrgD/J6xtGG
X-Received: by with SMTP id u4mr10735212wmb.86.1481558075262; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:54:35 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 07:54:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
From: Eran Messeri <>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 15:54:03 +0000
Message-ID: <>
To: "" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1148e998cab0900543781e45"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Policy for adding to IANA registries requested in 6962-bis
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 15:55:01 -0000

Some background as to why I propose each of the policies:
* Expert Review for Hash algorithm and Signature algorithm: The algorithm
selection does not affect the behaviour of the protocol. However, an expect
should make sure proposed additions are suitable (for example, that a
proposed hash algorithm does not suffer from known preimage attacks).
* Specification requirement for SCT & STH extensions: new values for these
extensions are meaningless without specifying what they do - how should
clients behave when encountering them.
* First-come-first-served for Log IDs: I can't see how an expect review
could be meaningful, given log operators requesting those IDs can't really
prove competence to "own" log IDs, so requiring a "minimal amount of
clerical information" seems enough.


On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Eran Messeri <> wrote:

> No policy has been specified in 6962-bis for adding values to the IANA
> registries requested.
> In I
> propose the following policies, all based on definitions in RFC5226:
> * Hash algorithms and Signature algorithms: Expert Review
> * SCT extensions and STH extensions: Specification Required
> * Log ID 1, Log ID 2: First Come First Served.
> Feedback welcome, since, as far as I recall, this topic was not discussed
> on the list previously.
> Eran