[Trans] Assignment Policy for the 6962-bis "CT VersionedTransTypes" registry

Rob Stradling <rob@sectigo.com> Wed, 16 October 2019 13:56 UTC

Return-Path: <rob@sectigo.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 E510E1200F4 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 06:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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=comodoca.onmicrosoft.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 I44zqpArnVaO for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 06:56:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr820072.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.82.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4AEA120026 for <trans@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 06:56:55 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=WVwLOBne3MoTf8modghQbDGE3HPE1QbRJ2IYuVOkLwRuibsHwm2bAtfzljWzOeobtwwNDcZL2mDqeTcl9Y5y8Z9ajTYRWklarsUBRN4IFbMdX3aUVAqUJu9Lz+0ERQORQmVbY3QNBnmtK84gAk7kPhoilK5h4wlTuAe2zvhYzSQC1R/NoshZCKJ0hh0NO43RxBjx6YVym447w63zjpryYnRqlcEf5dswP/dnzPUjRyjEL5H8obmkoI1AA+CDzYgSyQ8oj6n5iP5oDaB5iUlQExM0iCXy/xWz43ELC6Hfq2cc3QB4eXQtRQs9zzMjPVVXACxwMwkNBkZ27Lj0XOYCuQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UkkbyTfc+hE+0dGC/+9NNALjKymU9KJDsMWa64z/b+s=; b=LL/dSvXwHd/95CwK3Bk7nDLFZsb1xKvxWBvKhk9Qv/5xea+bScVWNuxgNtvceGUpI0RjU4hcRxQ8KwUP2z2YGPO208/A9h4iYPFDXrK9UoLTBG4pnP7TRtS0fSoDr6fne3OdF38aCQlnSfS6O17epUjdLsPesTarXNVw5ip07avKlNvjPC1XSbqKNDhCmMDLFL2EHYNRqteEYSQcr21s4u0De7isiphA0DuZZMKSrMtCI9SNJjJmYh7dq1CzqzChVKNk3049JmBQocwW9TPoJvjYznd1NyfUkzXlP1hqUhMyuojGHrCU/HrOX2Vw928EHO7q+XKpoKwlpMPege1RQg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sectigo.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=sectigo.com; dkim=pass header.d=sectigo.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comodoca.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-comodoca-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=UkkbyTfc+hE+0dGC/+9NNALjKymU9KJDsMWa64z/b+s=; b=A8k3367oLZWV7zjHE714q6Lb269hKvNPL+xFxJ8IQP45J1wUwlwDb5YpFf/iO/Ma06cQZ3h8Nop53yP7wkg7J4xOx+8oNlKo2vOBEf3d+f4Ec/9t7F237Emmw9sspgi8f6WQWJj0LEGHnBVPZFx2pT6xBhkmTTGXBEkTZOXo+Oo=
Received: from DM6PR17MB3162.namprd17.prod.outlook.com (20.176.124.223) by DM6PR17MB3788.namprd17.prod.outlook.com (20.180.21.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2347.23; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 13:56:53 +0000
Received: from DM6PR17MB3162.namprd17.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::20eb:41b7:b275:1695]) by DM6PR17MB3162.namprd17.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::20eb:41b7:b275:1695%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2347.023; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 13:56:53 +0000
From: Rob Stradling <rob@sectigo.com>
To: "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
CC: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
Thread-Topic: Assignment Policy for the 6962-bis "CT VersionedTransTypes" registry
Thread-Index: AQHVhCmQuM6dPQx6OECGVFVH5aWscA==
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 13:56:52 +0000
Message-ID: <8dcf429d-cc2a-f3b5-e33c-bdf83d2e11e3@sectigo.com>
References: <155257141035.2645.11460081509986673853.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <a4159bb4-b761-a4d5-6367-5aebb6aa984f@sectigo.com> <A5074603-DA70-4F96-A810-EEAF0D296B93@kuehlewind.net> <1589f7c5-c4cb-4a87-d972-f7664b954d3f@sectigo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1589f7c5-c4cb-4a87-d972-f7664b954d3f@sectigo.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-clientproxiedby: LO2P265CA0058.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:600:60::22) To DM6PR17MB3162.namprd17.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:192::31)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rob@sectigo.com;
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [2a0e:ac00:25d:300:f68e:38ff:fe7a:a226]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 13cdb46c-6f62-4473-6363-08d75240b2cf
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR17MB3788:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 3
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR17MB3788E735B6B7A0EEA7AE6B9AAA920@DM6PR17MB3788.namprd17.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 0192E812EC
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(136003)(54094003)(199004)(189003)(2351001)(305945005)(476003)(446003)(71190400001)(46003)(71200400001)(2616005)(25786009)(186003)(11346002)(8936002)(561944003)(6116002)(5660300002)(6506007)(86362001)(31686004)(386003)(53546011)(966005)(316002)(99286004)(2501003)(486006)(36756003)(31696002)(7736002)(76176011)(478600001)(52116002)(102836004)(8676002)(1730700003)(81156014)(81166006)(6436002)(66946007)(66476007)(4326008)(256004)(6306002)(5640700003)(6512007)(6486002)(14454004)(6916009)(2906002)(66446008)(64756008)(66556008); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR17MB3788; H:DM6PR17MB3162.namprd17.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: sectigo.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: Phn+qi6OZssl/K9I6OXJHTAaDABbFTwmWyCDpwgzHgl5YOMfjObFetx85zNFgBi+0gu+vJogQ+VtYD7t1OJUahBTNr1yjLvSnJpHEYpeEhJv/p9fq1J+ceYFZubtcI0nZVuCz2dgctK23ikxScJ+z30rA7Jx4UpHLLcOLNS4xH7QJQ1ANMwBEI46JKdJhuNXbbGuRR38cQ8bh51EUsBFNnkHGbeND6E8499SV9XlNICPPZdwPPVpfrPCRKDo6ELL/LjzM9V17/zBXeinkXd9K9mQfamuaUkubf6ZsBSNp3S/KVPZQaoev4tCpskO0pTlu6OeY6Ib9dO/NKoowxse0Ac+bSSTQrO2iqG3327BLjGtN4BFcnDRty7GSgPQrHyugicosT0Fi/Ys67ub0fEDI4+vUHmqbOCz2WcrVuhBuqw1JVcAGZ0TW9TO8uVllqH9jA/WliVhmW6Jsde8o6WD5Q==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <478EEA09757F6542A637C551ECF4BDE0@namprd17.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: sectigo.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 13cdb46c-6f62-4473-6363-08d75240b2cf
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Oct 2019 13:56:52.9004 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 0e9c4894-6caa-465d-9660-4b6968b49fb7
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 1+TVV35PJPy3WZVHQxvYaY2BC1ZWptUnqfNrl7qpIMf905REBWbjo/9fL2QRieYl0jyr/k+Grx7YqFZXOCoeww==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR17MB3788
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/ZWGY7PWLvwER31wmBJd2T-2yGxg>
Subject: [Trans] Assignment Policy for the 6962-bis "CT VersionedTransTypes" registry
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, 16 Oct 2019 13:56:58 -0000

Mirja has proposed that we change the assignment policy from 
"Specification Required" (see 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8126#section-4.6) to "IETF Review" (see 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8126#section-4.8).

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8126#section-4.11 says:
   "When reviewing a document that asks IANA to create a new registry or
    change a registration policy to any policy more stringent than Expert
    Review or Specification Required, the IESG should ask for
    justification to ensure that more relaxed policies have been
    considered and that the more strict policy is the right one."

Can anybody provide justification for adopting Mirja's proposal?

On 16/10/2019 14:36, Rob Stradling wrote:
> On 14/10/2019 16:32, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
<snip>
>>>>    8) sec 10.4: i Wonder if an RFC-required policy wouldn’t be more appropriate
>>>>    for the VersionedTransTypes registry?
>>>
>>> In 6962-bis section 10.4.1, we ask the appointed Expert to "review the
>>> public specification to ensure that it is detailed enough to ensure
>>> implementation interoperability".
>>>
>>> AFAICT from RFC8126, "RFC Required" doesn't imply Expert Review, whereas
>>> "Specification Required" does.  So I think we should leave it as
>>> "Specification Required”.
>>
>> RFC Required implies that the document got some reviews based on the respective process.
>>
>> However, I guess I actually wanted to propose IETF Review (and used the wrong term). That would imply that it had to go through the IETF process with respective review (and therefore usually it is expected that no expert review is needed in addition). Anyway this was mainly a comment to double-check this decision.
> 
> I personally don't have a preference, but I'll start another list thread
> to discuss this proposal.
<snip>

-- 
Rob Stradling
Senior Research & Development Scientist
Sectigo Limited