Re: [Uta] Adoption call for draft-sheffer-uta-rfc7525bis-00

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 2:04 AM tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote:

> What is the point of rfc7525bis?  Why do we need it?
>
> It seems to me that RFC7525 is a good set of recommendations and little
> has changed, in practical terms, since it was produced, although
> cryptanalysts can find weaknesses therein
>
> ---
> New Outlook Express and Windows Live Mail replacement - get it here:
> https://www.oeclassic.com/
>
> ..
>
> The one change I am aware of is that the TLS WG has produced TLS 1.3 - I
> follow the TLS WG mailing list - but so what?  TLS 1.3 failed to meet one
> key requirement

What is that key requirement?

and I am unclear whether or not TLS 1.3 will gain widespread use in the
> Internet, with HTTP, SMTP and such like.

I don't know about SMTP, but TLS 1.3 has *already* achieved widespread use
on the Internet.

28% of sites support it [https://www.ssllabs.com/ssl-pulse/]
Upward of 40% of TLS connections on Firefox Beta are TLS 1.3 [
https://telemetry.mozilla.org/new-pipeline/dist.html#!cumulative=0&end_date=2020-04-22&include_spill=0&keys=__none__!__none__!__none__&max_channel_version=beta%252F76&measure=SSL_HANDSHAKE_VERSION&min_channel_version=beta%252F73&processType=*&product=Firefox&sanitize=1&sort_by_value=0&sort_keys=submissions&start_date=2020-04-07&table=0&trim=1&use_submission_date=1
]

So, I am against adoption until it is clear that the I-D will endorse TLS
> 1.2 as adequate for most purposes.  After all, the TLS WG has yet to
> propose an I-D 'TLS 1.2 - Die, Die, Die'
>

Nor do we expect to in the near future. There is a difference between (1)
you should use version X and (2) you should not support version Y < X. The
question is what is best practice?

-Ekr

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Valery Smyslov <valery@smyslov.net>
> To: <uta@ietf.org>
> Cc: 'Yaron Sheffer' <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>, <uta-chairs@ietf.org>,
> 'Ralph Holz' <ralph.holz@gmail.com>, 'Peter Saint-Andre' <
> stpeter@mozilla.com>
> Sent: 26/04/2020 10:35:30
> Subject: [Uta] Adoption call for draft-sheffer-uta-rfc7525bis-00
>
> ________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Hi,
>
> during the last  virtual interim meeting the draft
> draft-sheffer-uta-bcp195bis-00 was presented and the authors asked for its
> adoption.
> The general feeling in the room was in favor of the adoption, however
> the authors were asked to rename it to *-rfc7525-bis.
> The authors have renamed the draft and asked the chairs for its adoption.
> Since our responsible AD thinks agrees that this work is within the charter
> of the WG, the chairs are issuing a formal call for adoption
> to confirm the results we had at the meeting.
>
> This message starts a two weeks call for adoption of the
> draft-sheffer-uta-rfc7525bis-00 draft.
> The call will end up 10 May 2020. Please send your opinions to the list
> before this date.
>
> Please if possible include any reasons supporting your opinion. If you
> support this adoption,
> please indicate whether you are ready to review this draft if it becomes a
> WG document.
>
> Regards,
> Leif & Valery.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Uta mailing list
> Uta@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
>
> _______________________________________________
> Uta mailing list
> Uta@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
>