Subject: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 05:57:28 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Transport Layer Security WG of the IETF.

        Title           : IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS
        Authors         : Joe Salowey
                          Sean Turner
	Filename        : draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-03.txt
	Pages           : 16
	Date            : 2018-01-03

Abstract:
   This document describes a number of changes to (D)TLS IANA registries
   that range from adding notes to the registry all the way to changing
   the registration policy.  These changes were mostly motivated by WG
   review of the (D)TLS-related registries undertaken as part of the
   TLS1.3 development process.  This document updates many (D)TLS RFCs
   (see updates header).

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-03
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-03

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-03

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 11:51:59 -0500

This draft addresses the remaining outstanding issues:
- text to transition for recommended Yes->No
- orphaning user_mapping and cert_type

This draft also addresses comments received by Ron Tse.

gh repo likewise updated:
https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates

As we discussed in Singapore, Stephen Farrell has graciously offered to Shepherd this draft; write-up can be found at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates/shepherdwriteup/

Kathleen is going to run the WGLC for us.  Over to you Kathleen ;)

spt

> On Jan 3, 2018, at 08:57, [email-masked] wrote:
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 16:58:52 +0000

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates/shepherdwriteup/

Gracious? Me? Well, I guess given the time of year it's ok to
pretend:-)

For those good at identifying folks based on writing style,
you'll quickly detect that Sean did the initial write-up and
I just did some edits. (Thanks Sean:-)

I do however fully agree with the content and did re-read the
draft etc. And I'm also convinced this is ready to go.

Cheers,
S.

-- 
PGP key change time for me.
New-ID 7B172BEA; old-ID 805F8DA2 expires Jan 24 2018.
NewWithOld sigs in keyservers.
Sorry if that mucks something up;-)

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 21:34:41 +0000

Hiya,

Kathleen's a bit busy at the moment so asked that, as shepherd,
I kick off the WGLC for this one (as the two chairs are authors).
The idea is that I'll summarise the WGLC thread to her and she
can then decide if this is ready to move forward.

So this starts a 2-week WGLC, ending on January 29th.

Cheers,
Shepherdy Stephen.

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 09:38:29 +1100

> So this starts a 2-week WGLC, ending on January 29th.

Ship it!

Nits:

6.  Adding recommended Column <- capital R, consider "Recommended" to
match later text.

8.  TLS ExtensionType Values <- TLS 1.3 adds more columns to this
table; this document should align with that (particularly since it
already depends on TLS 1.3)

I'm almost comfortable with this statement, though I'd like to confirm
that others are also: "Despite the following behavior being crazy,
[...]"

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 23:13:06 -0500

I’ll set the datatracker status.

spt

> On Jan 15, 2018, at 16:34, Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hiya,
> 
> <0x7B172BEA.asc>_______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> [email-masked]

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:54:59 +1100

> On Jan 16, 2018, at 09:38, Martin Thomson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

Okay can do.

> already depends on TLS 1.3)

I guess what I’ll do is note that I’m copying that text from the base spec and see how it goes.

> […]"

You should have seen my 1st draft.  I’ll tone it down to "Despite the following behavior being misguided,”

PR follows:

https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates/pull/57

spt

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 21:42:22 +0000

Hi Kathleen,

The WGLC for this has expired.

There was only one explicit comment [1] saying to ship it.
The WG have chatted about this a bunch of times though so
FWIW I think it'd be fair to conclude there's pretty good
consensus for this.

Cheers,
S.

[1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg25279.html

---

From: Kathleen Moriarty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 16:54:08 -0500

Great, thank you very much, Stephen!  I'll get it rolling towards
publication with last call starting soon.  I'll do my review in the
next couple of days.

Best regards,
Kathleen

-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 09:35:38 -0500

I have one PR that address both the WGLC comments (from mt and ekr):
https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates/pull/57

If you’ve got other suggested changes let me know and I can submit another PR and do the final merges before you initiate the IETFLC.

Cheers,

spt

> On Jan 30, 2018, at 16:54, Kathleen Moriarty <[email-masked]> wrote:
>

---

From: Benjamin Kaduk <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 10:34:04 -0600

On the "better late than never" front, I've got some nits:

OLD:

       [...] A Standards Track document
      [RFC8126 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8126>] is REQUIRED to register an extension with the value
      "Yes".

NEW:

      In order to register an extension with the value "Yes", a
Standards Track
      document [RFC8126] is REQUIRED.

Since not all standards-track documents must register such
extensions/cipher suites/etc.  (There are multiple occurrences of this
text.)

Is the "Exporter Value" table in the document supposed to have a
"Recommended" column?

Let's also double-check that the "WARNING: Cryptographic
algorithms[...]" text does not always say "cipher suites listed here",
even when talking about (e.g.) HashAlgorithm and SignatureAlgorithm.

(Also, we can spell "SignatureAlgorithm" as not-"SignarureAlgorithm".)

Maybe capitalize "TBD" in "tbd but maybe [email-masked]"?

OLD:

   Recommended algorithms regarded as secure for general use at the time
   of registration, however, cryptographic algorithms and parameters
   will be broken or weakened over time.

NEW:

   Recommended algorithms are regarded as secure for general use at the time
   of registration, however, cryptographic algorithms and parameters
   will be broken or weakened over time.

NOTES:

Add "are" to improve grammar.

-Ben

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 19:53:42 -0500

> On Jan 31, 2018, at 11:34, Benjamin Kaduk <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
>       [
> RFC8126
> ] is REQUIRED to register an extension with the value
>       "Yes".
> 
> NEW:
> 
>       In order to register an extension with the value "Yes", a Standards Track
> Since not all standards-track documents must register such extensions/cipher suites/etc.  (There are multiple occurrences of this text.)

Fixed (I think) 4x in the following PR:
https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates/pull/58

> Is the "Exporter Value" table in the document supposed to have a "Recommended" column?

Yeah we should add one ;). Address in the PR.

> Let's also double-check that the "WARNING: Cryptographic algorithms[...]" text does not always say "cipher suites listed here", even when talking about (e.g.) HashAlgorithm and SignatureAlgorithm.
> 
> (Also, we can spell "SignatureAlgorithm" as not-"SignarureAlgorithm”.)

Fix in the PR.

> Maybe capitalize "TBD" in "tbd but maybe [email-masked]”?

Because the list has actually been created I put the email address in the draft (in the PR).

> Add "are" to improve grammar.

Included in PR.

spt

>>>> [1] 
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg25279.html
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 03/01/18 13:57, 
>>>>> [email-masked]
>>>>>  wrote: