IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] Summary of DISCUSS items for draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Wed, 03 June 2020 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 975343A08DA for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
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 6LzIqwks7iDh for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:32:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8685B3A08E2 for <trans@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:32:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 053GIZin013739; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 17:32:14 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=ReJGZ6keqHOGzZMunh4PMCd0uoCWHS9WBvoXnTG1uXY=; b=lGNmkmSUDWw9swFzTGkIPnN2zmmmxyEcykSfiWnZdbMQUj23WyrctbkIA5w7nf0xVQqa x3VnQpzj/XTXijXj00x1pzEKbdAHHux6s/wHoLzY+Td631O+zal+G32TCWcm7TKwsL3j zTjeh84LBeWDRAHOKqE2VC06XkkPUU0iUqNLgjPzV8wl/r7Ou78jJp2S1iEg5tijB0j1 NNMq3V4Yny8kvjlk16UxNdwOt7HHr3uvS/212uKb2IGpu3VEtA0eFgx/fOJuoGj7t168 5X/oSp8r5nAhhP/zmxtho7h6MIELl3r+B6cbEsdk5TT8oW89bKmEEceiuNfdJlyp08A/ Hw==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint7 (a72-247-45-33.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [72.247.45.33] (may be forged)) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 31d8tevtax-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 03 Jun 2020 17:32:14 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint7.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint7.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 053GLCv6021983; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 12:32:13 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.115]) by prod-mail-ppoint7.akamai.com with ESMTP id 31efac81f0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 03 Jun 2020 12:32:13 -0400
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.165.119) by ustx2ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.165.124) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:32:12 -0700
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.119]) by ustx2ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.119]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 11:32:12 -0500
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Trans] Summary of DISCUSS items for draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis
Thread-Index: AQHWOcSINEoBTpOxqkWyZwlkW4aJCQ==
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 16:32:11 +0000
Message-ID: <0326AF38-C3C7-43D8-824F-31D0E9879564@akamai.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.37.20051002
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.118.24]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <7E1E3CDC3EFEBE49A9172DD42F694F8B@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-06-03_13:2020-06-02, 2020-06-03 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=745 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2004280000 definitions=main-2006030129
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-06-03_13:2020-06-02, 2020-06-03 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 cotscore=-2147483648 clxscore=1011 mlxlogscore=718 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2004280000 definitions=main-2006030129
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/EOtCQiuDILAwJGi9WKvn3IAlXbM>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Summary of DISCUSS items for draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/trans/>
List-Post: <mailto:trans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 16:32:18 -0000

    >    o  An Online Certificate Status Protocol (OCSP) [RFC6960] response
    >       extension (see Section 7.1.1), where the OCSP response is provided
    >       in the "CertificateStatus" message, provided that the TLS client
    >       included the "status_request" extension in the (extended)
    >       "ClientHello" (Section 8 of [RFC6066]).  [...]
    > 
    > This is not quite a TLS 1.3-compliant formulation -- TLS 1.3 does not use the
    > "CertificateStatus message", but rather uses the encoding of that structure in a
    > status_request extension in the CertificateEntry.
    > draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis

    I haven't seen discussion of Ben's DISCUSS feedback

Oh come on now.

This draft has sat with no action for a very long time, and now someone is supposed to rouse the authors, and the working group, to address a new RFC that didn't exist (drafts did, yes).  Compare the timelines of the two documents.

Close the group, and let the draft lie or publish the damn thing.  What's going on now is just cruel.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email