IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] New Version of draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt (12)

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Mon, 16 March 2020 12:54 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 139953A077C for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 kS4vgYPMJgIw for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22e.google.com (mail-lj1-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 790173A076E for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22e.google.com with SMTP id r24so18529676ljd.4 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qhSmzK6TPS7tkh1sseKkbsyDB0+mkxfD5SZchhxxkBM=; b=gKIObchDRhaOYzvWDjytS5olEn5r7Spt+C74Xgb+uFXBw5xN5ssw/lP/D3sNbAFZdb 7zZiPY0TzuKm5FBjLDw3ifRTcFHefAs/HxvAhDhCiCIbbEQS6SGMD0xnIgA6huSOGoik WPIYbrLO/zwBs52mQ3+oQv4p+ZqUTGU9a8Dcrs+fECEWUVjCF4ZhAq0Cl1dkhx2O2mM+ hsUzKTNaLETHYw29Es9NH5FktOX+27zobE3gbSkDNNCimwyWxzu0aE3WoHvwQjCktgNA fZDYxW6YKGie3HQEtplWM8fXxLYC2HUnfbYPi7UxcsvCbI1dOtSaAb+VP7AxqQenvujN 5dVg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qhSmzK6TPS7tkh1sseKkbsyDB0+mkxfD5SZchhxxkBM=; b=mhU9bXKbpBzYaV9/Qz5qpMy16w2CkvXMSy40suvqAJmoHUtF477V+2ciWmQm0iahwJ VWuhlbLT9/0trnpRtBvG+PeQkzc//dhi3qHLwZHXQ/kWwFRCVcu2XQ/WYqg9ErILG+VG cvnYGj4xNVEmHElG1TtkwwqL3a8a2sbd5xgG1W/UDWiNmmiUWrobTDqojjDtJYFyRVDD tk1Wp0TWiRvmFe7oiqei4YNIHUAebernd19QWoN5zG61RZ9Gmb11/NkHJ1TryK4NQHQC oiHrfT46F+kL4b5ebW1guhpvOoZSmsDM7xIAHH36KMub4HZV3JPCWKhB5g4RPYWNHIwq b7mQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1i2lMpXxsT/2jHfVLI1Hdi7rW2Vhw0Yz/O6XQvcGZN0bO9iRqp glMoozRiXBLVopnfUQg32s4UUymaMhK5cbRpmJDrYHxT8lM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtXcZDDinBSlQ5IbROTFQP5NaRkKz/3vZrbwn2/98dsIj0Roh/ZJDrYSQA6DYXe+hrCTh86dgsQ3YC7dhzZ9Ow=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b5a5:: with SMTP id f5mr16195625ljn.162.1584363263681; Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158279435525.6196.11790581771168846041.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <3c7f9e3c-d4f6-b002-5e16-6611d654c8eb@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <CAPDSy+5e0HYhBJdQm-ZhBcqmqwKGkpaKU8t_9R2_P=nAOs9s2w@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOdDU0zQ+ZNQqu1vDWxQuLUzGqi9MMXPDUs-izZEgVQsg@mail.gmail.com> <1f15faeb-dc6f-1402-db55-940666c9f913@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <1f15faeb-dc6f-1402-db55-940666c9f913@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 05:53:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBP5i6dd21Pzw7uqE_2KxHUfFdygyRmqYnTuJRLharmoxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Cc: David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@gmail.com>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000086f10f05a0f85175"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/TkJYJ9vT6hBoz2CQGs7RZE7JGHE>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] New Version of draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt (12)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 12:54:27 -0000

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 2:19 AM Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
wrote:

> Catching-up just on the following: We could strongly agree that
> ossification is an impediment about which there has been a general
> growing awareness. I do not mind changing the words here at all:
>

This was intended as an example of my concerns, not the totality of them.

-Ekr


> On 13/03/2020 16:20, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > In the first passage, the use "in response to perceptions" creates
> > the impression that ossification is just some people's opinion,
> > whereas it seems to me that it is a commonly understood fact of
>
>
> e.g.:
>
> OLD:
>
>        One motive to encrypt transport headers is in response to
>        perceptions that the network has become ossified, since traffic
>        inspecting middleboxes prevent new protocols and mechanisms from
>        being deployed.
>
> NEW:
>
>        One motive to encrypt transport headers is in response to
>        growing awareness of the implications of network ossification
> from traffic
>        inspecting middleboxes that prevent new protocols and mechanisms
> from
>        being deployed.
>
> ... or make a suggestion?
>
> Gorry
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email