Subject: [Trans] Toronto planning

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 15:18:57 -0800

We've got a 2.5-hour slot on Friday, and based on discussions with Paul
and Ben, here's what we think is going to be on the agenda:

1) 6962bis status, updates, issues.  This will include discussion
   of issues raised on the mailing list, issue tracker tickets against
   the document, and so on

2) Gossip protocols, or rather a gossip protocol proposal.  I do not
   believe there is a write-up of this anywhere yet, so this should be
   seen as the start of that discussion

3) Other applications.  We've had some discussion both here and offline
   of dnssec logging, and there's been some interest in logging
   signatures of executables/binaries

4) any other work that needs to be done.  At the last meeting we had
   a brief discussion of whether or not a client behavior document
   should be separated out of the bis document; without a volunteer to
   do it the question is moot.

What are we omitting or have we forgotten?  We'll get a firmer agenda
out towards the end of next week, based on this list and any additional
feedback.

Melinda

---

From: Eran Messeri <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2014 10:19:53 +0100

In addition, I propose a brief explanation on the following topics:
* The way to avoid logging private subdomains (now-closed Trac ticket #1
<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/1>). That's one of the
major changes since the last meeting (IIRC) so we should make sure it
answers the needs of CAs while not introducing new security concerns (on
top of what was already discussed).
* Proof fetching via DNS queries: Ben recently implemented this mechanism
for privacy-preserving inclusion proof lookups. In addition to description
of the mechanism, it's worth discussing whether this mechanism should be
mandatory for every log.

On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> Trans mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
>

---

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 10:52:30 -0800

> top of what was already discussed).

It might be a good idea to start discussion on the mailing list
prior to the meeting - if nothing else, there's a broader
constituency on the mailing list and you're more likely to
receive CA feedback.  If it gets contentious (which doesn't
appear likely) we'd need to close it on the mailing list,
anyway.

Do you feel that it would be helpful to have a separate slot for
these, or would you be okay with addressing them as part of
running down the tickets during the meeting?

Melinda