IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] Fw: Re: WGLC started for draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis

Stephen Kent <s@zerho.info> Thu, 24 May 2018 15:56 UTC

Return-Path: <s@zerho.info>
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 12B3A12EAE7 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2018 08:56:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.801
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=zerho.info
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 qoWIVZMxofEL for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 May 2018 08:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail4.protonmail.ch (mail4.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.27]) (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 ED5E212EAB9 for <trans@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 May 2018 08:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 11:55:53 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zerho.info; s=protonmail; t=1527177360; bh=lR9InU1/HW/84zyFF6fGsLpOT9IFS7sMT6S7QbCgzNk=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From; b=rEpOEAuwepZDBzJkTAFhHFUqkKcfH0L9GCh00CHlN4h2pbhkNABj37kYGwVdTax2S aX28nBQ3gHhmALqV60nwnp3orpOM8PnJyyalM3ftkIfKzq2cftdv7suMwxcbcYB02C RPeAAkTy65qv0IJJZVcWNoFKVXzUd+n7+8+aA9Co=
To: Rob Stradling <Rob@ComodoCA.com>
From: Stephen Kent <s@zerho.info>
Cc: Trans <trans@ietf.org>, Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com>
Reply-To: Stephen Kent <s@zerho.info>
Message-ID: <ymBGDj-Ei12W8renlt7hwQrRHhMfaF0BkMra1uwwMUJ5oLvdvGzfgvyt3ruiALHNIaYvkxbK2veCUC0x8lqftEGz0PtooQ9n8Lrrd_ZAuEE=@zerho.info>
In-Reply-To: <aeeabb93-7866-6ba1-089d-498ebd7ac1b5@ComodoCA.com>
References: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1804161658150.17034@bofh.nohats.ca> <20180507122941.300b69582fa3acdb52b625af@andrewayer.name> <alhGtNm005X-hBR82niHi9RpJoLosgZF8ah8HC4qLzFX0PPStVGSTbgJtP-zrg1u8vgfb_IiQ70ANuRua2kjRf4zwutQHVRo3pE2PCgZfHo=@zerho.info> <CAErg=HH7XM=a3fyYeSLnGA+C1iYrZT6VRPdpMfJw-JVqUirjEA@mail.gmail.com> <yqGvHLiIFLQmYLTXEs2HOxQ9pP5_634xn8j11yFHd0kTzP0CrgQpvrOuunpLVTDMJTjSohfMkruNfl_-8buytZkxqrko2I__1Vqe5dJ4mx4=@zerho.info> <CAErg=HFChT=PZJXJXXMrObE_R7C6JUtoTVWVHSJ_1qFHbYGopA@mail.gmail.com> <H6YU269er4XOfoCJXCreRcvJxuC9Q-t3qoygTBrLpkQqnQCDou75SAXhM1S0UomT1VGphqB6L5hyEln3qfoA8RTozgAwzL0HW7AWjsqndiY=@zerho.info> <z_TIgNyWjgjV4k6G4deE0fHezpEeWD0UIwdPv1xJuQ1z2wLPVcgDPfogcAMW0bThJuuvI7S9H02au_l293RUfSmfZ7pnGyRxI_DHGCNe0gA=@zerho.info> <aeeabb93-7866-6ba1-089d-498ebd7ac1b5@ComodoCA.com>
Feedback-ID: J6dPlme6glBGJLMEtGsaqJPE6vPDBSW6lOheJXLXjEWBxgn8P1CEZKbZGc4D01YOct3XeTXymnV_hlw9t4YeHg==:Ext:ProtonMail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/JaP8-gxpGLqyWotxcdiQ9PDZVew>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Fw: Re: WGLC started for draft-ietf-trans-threat-analysis
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 24 May 2018 15:56:23 -0000

Rob,


> from all the logs, and takes the view that all certs are interesting ;-) ).
> 
> Is crt.sh a Monitor?

As we described Monitor behavior in our (now expired, never adopted) Monitor draft, yes. Also in the architecture draft (not expired, but also not adopted).

According to the cited text in 6962-bis, no.

Steve

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email