I believe the consensus supports what is in the current PR.
Cheers,
Joe
On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Joe,
>
> Can you clarify whether you believe consensus is to make the "Recommended"
> list the list in the current PR or the MTI list. I can edit the document
> eithe
Joe,
Can you clarify whether you believe consensus is to make the "Recommended"
list the list in the current PR or the MTI list. I can edit the document
either
way.
-Ekr
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Joseph Salowey wrote:
> It looks like we have rough consensus to accept this PR. We can s
It looks like we have rough consensus to accept this PR. We can still have
discussion on the naming of the categories. We will also have to define
the IANA registration policy for changing the "recommended" bit. I'll
open an issue for this, I think changing the bit to recommended should
require
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Martin Rex wrote:
> Eric Rescorla wrote:
> >
> > There are presently four categories of cipher suites vis-a-vis TLS 1.3.
> >
> > 1. MUST or SHOULD cipher suites.
> > 2. Standards track cipher suites (or ones we are making ST, like
> > the ECC ones).
> > 3. Non
Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> There are presently four categories of cipher suites vis-a-vis TLS 1.3.
>
> 1. MUST or SHOULD cipher suites.
> 2. Standards track cipher suites (or ones we are making ST, like
> the ECC ones).
> 3. Non standards track cipher suites
> 4. Cipher suites you can't use at a
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Monday 16 November 2015 15:16:50 Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/345
> >
> > Per discussion in Yokohama, I have rewritten the IANA considerations
> > section so that the 16-bit code spaces are "Specifi
On Monday 16 November 2015 15:16:50 Eric Rescorla wrote:
> PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/345
>
> Per discussion in Yokohama, I have rewritten the IANA considerations
> section so that the 16-bit code spaces are "Specification Required"
> and they have a "Recommended" column.
>
> 1.
On Tuesday, November 17, 2015 02:14:00 pm Ilari Liusvaara wrote:
> All current registered/proposed ciphersuites that work in TLS 1.3 are
> *-GCM or *-POLY1305 ones (with DHE or ECDHE).
DHE AES CCM is still in the list, even after the changes in the current
proposal. ECDHE AES CCM is not as it's n
I prefer to see two categories: recommended and “no comment”
MUST or SHOULD are recommended and everything else is “no comment”
Having one pool, from which we can cherry-pick, as opposed to finer levels of
gradation, seems simpler. If and when we’re ready to move Goldilocks/448 to
recommended,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:14:00PM +0200, Ilari Liusvaara wrote:
> > Where does that leave ciphersuites that are "Recommended" for TLS
> > 1.2, but TLS 1.3? Or do none of the CBC block ciphers in TLS 1.2 qualify?
>
> None of block ciphers (nor stream ciphers) work in TLS 1.3 at all.
>
> All cur
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Viktor Dukhovni
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:51:32AM -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> > My proposal is that we:
> >
> > - List all the Standards Track cipher suites that are compatible with TLS
> > 1.3 in Appendix A.
> >
> > - Mark all the cipher suites tha
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 07:06:52PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:51:32AM -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> > My proposal is that we:
> >
> > - List all the Standards Track cipher suites that are compatible with TLS
> > 1.3 in Appendix A.
> >
> > - Mark all the cipher su
.
From: Eric Rescorla [mailto:e...@rtfm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 11:01 AM
To: Andrei Popov
Cc: Russ Housley ; IETF TLS
Subject: Re: [TLS] PR#345: IANA Considerations
I would be fine with any name people want to use here :)
-Ekr
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Andrei Popov
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:51:32AM -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> My proposal is that we:
>
> - List all the Standards Track cipher suites that are compatible with TLS
> 1.3 in Appendix A.
>
> - Mark all the cipher suites that are listed in Appendix A as "Recommended"
Where does that leave cipher
> is generally unlikely to move to the “standard” category.
>
>
>
> *From:* Eric Rescorla [mailto:e...@rtfm.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 17, 2015 10:47 AM
> *To:* Andrei Popov
> *Cc:* Russ Housley ; IETF TLS
>
> *Subject:* Re: [TLS] PR#345: IANA Considerations
>
; IETF TLS
Subject: Re: [TLS] PR#345: IANA Considerations
Here is my understanding
- Recommended things are things which the IETF has reviewed and thinks are good.
- Not recommended things are things which the IETF has not reviewed and may be
fine but may also be bad.
The intention is to break
f.org] *On Behalf Of *Russ Housley
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 17, 2015 10:01 AM
> *To:* IETF TLS
> *Subject:* Re: [TLS] PR#345: IANA Considerations
>
>
>
> +1. This seems like a reasonable way forward.
>
>
>
> Russ
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2015, a
What is the intended use of the "Recommended" list? I.e. how is an implementer
supposed to think about this marker?
Cheers,
Andrei
From: TLS [mailto:tls-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Russ Housley
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 10:01 AM
To: IETF TLS
Subject: Re: [TLS] PR
+1. This seems like a reasonable way forward.
Russ
On Nov 17, 2015, at 12:51 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> There are presently four categories of cipher suites vis-a-vis TLS 1.3.
>
> 1. MUST or SHOULD cipher suites.
> 2. Standards track cipher suites (or ones we are making ST, like
> the ECC
On 11/17/2015 10:46 AM, Joe Salowey wrote:
> I think the TLS 1.3 IANA considerations should just deal with setting up the
> recommended column and marking it for the cipher suites/extensions that are
> described in the 1.3 document. Other cipher suites/extensions can be marked
> as recommended
There are presently four categories of cipher suites vis-a-vis TLS 1.3.
1. MUST or SHOULD cipher suites.
2. Standards track cipher suites (or ones we are making ST, like
the ECC ones).
3. Non standards track cipher suites
4. Cipher suites you can't use at all with TLS 1.3, like AES-CBC.
I thi
I think the TLS 1.3 IANA considerations should just deal with setting up the
recommended column and marking it for the cipher suites/extensions that are
described in the 1.3 document. Other cipher suites/extensions can be marked
as recommended through other documents.
On 11/17/15, 6:54 A
On Nov 17, 2015, at 16:40, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> > 1. The Cipher Suites "Recommended" column was populated based on
> > the Standards Track RFCs listed in the document (and I removed the
> > others).
>
> Isn’t it just the MTI suites listed in s8.1?
>
> Maybe I need to go check the mi
On Nov 17, 2015, at 16:40, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> > On Nov 17, 2015, at 01:18, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> >
> > Double-checking, I see that some of the entries in the "TLS 1.3" column
> > for Extensions are wrong. Will be updating sho
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> > On Nov 17, 2015, at 01:18, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> >
> > Double-checking, I see that some of the entries in the "TLS 1.3" column
> > for Extensions are wrong. Will be updating shortly.
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Eric Rescorla
> On Nov 17, 2015, at 01:18, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> Double-checking, I see that some of the entries in the "TLS 1.3" column
> for Extensions are wrong. Will be updating shortly.
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/345
>
>
Double-checking, I see that some of the entries in the "TLS 1.3" column
for Extensions are wrong. Will be updating shortly.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/345
>
> Per discussion in Yokohama, I have rewritten the IANA considera
PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/345
Per discussion in Yokohama, I have rewritten the IANA considerations section
so that the 16-bit code spaces are "Specification Required" and they have
a "Recommended" column.
1. The Cipher Suites "Recommended" column was populated based on
the
28 matches
Mail list logo
