IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962

Eran Messeri <eranm@google.com> Wed, 12 March 2014 15:08 UTC

Return-Path: <eranm@google.com>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141291A073C for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.925
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 hUr3ghvY-mtz for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:08:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oa0-x22b.google.com (mail-oa0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4406B1A09B4 for <trans@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:08:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id g12so10304131oah.16 for <trans@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=LDJ1PTPcMX/jEMbj5ihugD6bqXxI+p6X8oiNGwihzs4=; b=DO1BfNCTuETcDJukePcuX2U6EwNIvWMYbwLUFg6RxE6UnfZRZI22cEex2Qqc3uh2zS QG2FKKCtwATbtloeHdMlrMEy4WCEoQWpnbQ/7wibOjcmssb2oVw0cz29eRqGHzy4EjmB FFCUbuAaozTzsyEIO0Pu/8udc1Ie1QXbvRxI5Ake012ScsR1uAytpHliv78si61sr1ZJ STPIOWomjDnvP0JprMdqq1O0S7fqz1k0pR6E4vnjjcJjE7k6lwUHVDTvrppzTxn6a6kY 8dgoQQLGNLdIyD0ET+aBIkUqyyibAguRHGysqp+j8E+RUlY+6kvY+MnlMWqjRy13oquF JxUw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=LDJ1PTPcMX/jEMbj5ihugD6bqXxI+p6X8oiNGwihzs4=; b=d9R0B6WW6QbJ3WnvH5FSQp+2Pno2lDlZPty+XJDPgUqUHdqm9x5eu8uC7KO1rXtqDR 7O9dp+VjBDL3zniD8PM6nMcd8gX1VuwKB5CIQnEbRbPeRDIADEMX8AiL1evg/mC0Aj0+ 0sqvWo0T0fgsCpXJNyUfMDPJddydXj3qCv0S7mpC2rL/Q57xThCNNW8vIT096ugv5iSD 27ei6KKMK7PfAi7dfxQf6+cEu5bF0fdcHZYOaU6tp182zOX2BdSuKYu2PzaCOL1vtF12 LDYd5oR8nRlXZWdw99RXWjMN7grP3wW61q/lCktxAKY9cZ2sgafHCS2M7A/xynIbC3WR if+g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkA7zlDs452U6gXtFlX4GpAOVuRAanUoAivATcf132xvsElOm7tlHDmgW/SeStyXR6UBsngEjLIgoRRVXyFWb3K99TkMBzC0BXp2kzKEc5rwOyzzTIf2sXl5piBDYi1OrIRCJV7A6t0g1P5Dg5sVvE4UdTCFGzF0xDH2o4Mo1iPiitYb5pNGuCIp/GdCXDvFVB2v2M/
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.18.102 with SMTP id v6mr913366obd.71.1394636906994; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.182.142.198 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 08:08:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABrd9SShfCcahg7C-eHFpn8=wLgkLgsUPhFM7O2LhOO-J9jh1g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMm+LwhpCD9gf_XJUTsKBo3739jOeiHdedqWwi3b0jkeZkSo8w@mail.gmail.com> <CABrd9SQim3ev=2rsCDXSF5fWqv3+cKf9j-88pQ+4NAaBV9w2PA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+LwjGdit7smWasFB5FVAnkjZ_ejnGPKiSPwMNMVQ8fMRT-w@mail.gmail.com> <CABrd9SShfCcahg7C-eHFpn8=wLgkLgsUPhFM7O2LhOO-J9jh1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 15:08:26 +0000
Message-ID: <CALzYgEc5rv=Zdm_dqZ9CAvrstiECGKzyjWK4yqty=kqNjS0uWg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eran Messeri <eranm@google.com>
To: Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c339e66ebd3604f46a35b9"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/_3DI2V74cYYp2MdALJdkeABU3G4
Cc: "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Further comments on RFC 6962
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 12 Mar 2014 15:08:43 -0000

Created ticket 11 <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/11> to
track get-sth-consistency parameters order.


On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Ben Laurie <benl@google.com> wrote:

> On 11 March 2014 15:52, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Ben Laurie <benl@google.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Since a 6962-bis already exists
> >> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis/) it
> >> would be better to comment on that. But I think all these comments
> >> apply anyway.
> >>
> >> On 10 March 2014 20:58, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > 4) sha256_root_hash.
> >> >
> >> > Really? This should be an object that has an algorithm/data pair.
> >> > Encoding
> >> > the algorithm into the tag is going to make algorithm agility hard.
> >>
> >> I agree about the name. Not sure I agree about agility. We don't think
> >> a log can change algorithm partway through - at least, we don't think
> >> we want to specify how.
> >>
> >> If you want a new algorithm, you start a new log.
> >
> >
> > But the digest algorithm has to be specified somewhere. Or how does the
> > client discover what it is?
>
> The acceptable logs and their algorithms are built into the client -
> alternatively, they can retrieve a list of log metadata (keys,
> algorithms, MMDs, etc). We will be distributing such a list
> corresponding to what Chrome accepts.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Trans mailing list
> Trans@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email