Re: [tsvwg] [OPSAWG] TSVWG WGLC: draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-08, closes 23 October 2019

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Tue, 05 November 2019 02:39 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 E8A4C12006B; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 18:39:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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=joelhalpern.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 y4tiSY55vOb4; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 18:39:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (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 3788612004D; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 18:39:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476Ylm6fF1z1x0PZ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 18:39:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1572921572; bh=YB4ILCq09o4Qo0v6Y3Y8wTn9YfNPZjU1TjWHDryiBJk=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=YbzHKabWBtBqyTwSHKdmO/hqvpbRZtYIRwMwDKT8kZTQCAQX6helyR4kBgE+ft9B5 PpTfcvuX7NcRnz/vIyGBdujxfSq93lobq/nODprgCF4E2PWgzy6crMHPZBSc6d76aA TVd2vyNrrMsBwUQB/fNDM0lpDkf0P05GG1Mn28JM=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at maila2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 476Yll59n1z1x0PY; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 18:39:31 -0800 (PST)
To: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Cc: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, "IETF IPPM WG (ippm@ietf.org)" <ippm@ietf.org>, tsvwg-chairs <tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>, "quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>, "saag@ietf.org" <saag@ietf.org>
References: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D2432779493630766752@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <4460_1571933453_5DB1CD0D_4460_57_4_5AE9CCAA1B4A2248AB61B4C7F0AD5FB931F030A0@OPEXCAUBM44.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <1572918247420.10381@cs.auckland.ac.nz> <CABcZeBPy_39o37snzy8F6iyLQMg1aGkYbhy0A1N-PxFUmAmB0g@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <f2b1f803-b559-a166-8009-baff551bec5c@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:39:28 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBPy_39o37snzy8F6iyLQMg1aGkYbhy0A1N-PxFUmAmB0g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/hy0kEVV2jdEBUS0N_Nhin4bag_8>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] [OPSAWG] TSVWG WGLC: draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-08, closes 23 October 2019
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 02:39:35 -0000

If the authors want to publish it as an RFC so as to comment on other 
RFCs, they could approach the Independent Stream Editor.  That sort of 
publication is one of the explicit purposes of the Independent Stream.

Yours,
Joel

On 11/4/2019 9:34 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 5:44 PM Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz 
> <mailto:pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>> wrote:
> 
>     I actually think it's a pretty good summary, and delivers exactly what's
>     promised in the title.  OTOH I can also see that it's going to get
>     bikeshedded
>     to death, and will probably never be editable into a form where
>     people won't
>     complain about it no matter how many changes are made. 
>     Alternatively, it'll
>     end up watered down to a point where no-one can complain any more
>     but it won't
>     say anything terribly useful by then.
> 
>     Perhaps it could be published as is with a comment that it
>     represents the
>     opinions of the authors?  Although given that it's Informational and not
>     Standards-track or a BCP, that should be a given anyway.
> 
> 
> Actually, no. Most IETF documents, even informational ones, bear a 
> statement that they have IETF Consensus.
> 
> See: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5741#section-3.2.1 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5741#section-3..2.1>
> 
> -Ekr
> 
> 
>     Peter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
>