Re: [tsvwg] [saag] Comments on draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-08.txt

Peter Gutmann <> Wed, 06 November 2019 10:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 861B9120835; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 02:11:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 osI2B5UgLGiJ; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 02:11:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E54B4120829; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 02:11:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;;; q=dns/txt; s=mail; t=1573035095; x=1604571095; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=+sQXlU9sg8AwhUefQMqAGRaapk7UG4EzQHi5oVNGOgc=; b=N1ab8kwoG+LY37atgq8R3QksUEjDfJxi3fiYD1qya1HtW8XLlVXfe+hg HiAEoJbIOW0z+FYv6Dinx45VRmtBWKnqpmOchfWSaF5YzltYzwkAQPac1 aQIJY1uAcNXTTvj90H/UMcq+Niyxg3YLyfMbvrk0LRl2O1EcOZQn9WFX/ KLAoya9usLmYh9A98lmAYJDM5avL6v1FMC63ETCOoXLhi58ukCQ+sztPo pS4fPbvzrf2YMYwiB9TAW8BTeVck+52XSJQHNgroXgsfEAK6ibPeh3Xmq FMf4RHlsDR6iUlezPHFViJmgpkvaEU+96vV5M6FQj7y+CRvFPDwxbd1h5 A==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.68,274,1569240000"; d="scan'208";a="98362132"
X-Ironport-Source: - Outgoing - Outgoing
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 06 Nov 2019 23:11:32 +1300
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 23:11:32 +1300
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 23:11:32 +1300
From: Peter Gutmann <>
To: David Schinazi <>, Joe Touch <>
CC: "" <>, Mirja Kuehlewind <>, tsvwg IETF list <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [saag] [tsvwg] Comments on draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-08.txt
Thread-Index: AQHVkyCjrwMtocCjZ0izavTli3wJVKd6WcIAgAAVngCAAARbAIABsv2AgAAFtwCAAARPgIAACCuAgAASewCAAaJ3cA==
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:11:31 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-NZ
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] [saag] Comments on draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-08.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 10:11:38 -0000

David Schinazi <> writes:

>I also oppose publication of draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt. This
>document discourages transport header encryption and publishing it could harm
>future protocol development.

More than any other comment, this one seems to sum up the real opposition to
publication of this document:

  This document conflicts with my political agenda, so it cannot be allowed to
  be published.

It's a well-written discussion of issues that need to be taken into account
when considering header encryption.  Taking the "lalalalala-I'm-not-listening-
lalalala" approach won't make these issues go away, it just means that they'll
come and bite implementers and deployers of header-encryption protocols
because the document that would have discussed them in order to allow them to
be addressed at the design stage before they became a problem was suppressed.

May I instead rephrase the above objection slightly to:

  I also support publication of draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt.  This
  document points out real issues that need to be taken into consideration
  when encrypting headers, and not publishing it will harm future protocol