Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On 30/07/2022 23:24, Rob Sayre wrote: I agree with the authors on leaving the draft as-is. +1 S OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc Description: OpenPGP public key OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Uta mailing list Uta@iet

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 12:41 PM Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Hi again, > > The authors have conferred on this and at this time we don't think that > we can recommend anything other than EC ciphers, for several reasons: > > 1. DHE negotiation is broken. > > 2. Static RSA is out of the question. > >

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:29 PM Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > And, surprisingly enough, that's already mentioned in the applicability > statement section of this document: > > This document does not discuss the use of TLS in constrained-node > networks [RFC7228]. For recommendations rega

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On 7/15/22 11:54 AM, Rob Sayre wrote: On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:47 AM Benjamin Kaduk > wrote: On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:30:55AM -0700, Rob Sayre wrote: > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:19 AM Cullen Jennings via Datatracker < > nore...@ietf.org

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:47 AM Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:30:55AM -0700, Rob Sayre wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:19 AM Cullen Jennings via Datatracker < > > nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > > > > > > > I see no evidence of any > > > discussion of how that will work out

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:30:55AM -0700, Rob Sayre wrote: > On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:19 AM Cullen Jennings via Datatracker < > nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > > > > I see no evidence of any > > discussion of how that will work out for things that use HTTP but are not > > browsers. > > > > There jus

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 7:19 AM Cullen Jennings via Datatracker < nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > > I don't think BCP is the appropriate status for this. I think it should be > PS. > It explicitly says that is not trying to change existent advice in > existing RFC > and theses will need other RFC to "mo

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 12:14 PM Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > On ESNI in section 3.7. My view is the statement "this information leak > is > > closed by use of TLS Encrypted Client Hello." is false. The traffic > patters to > > most websites along with IP even when fronted very often reveal exact

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

On Sat, Jul 09, 2022 at 02:30:03PM -0600, Cullen Jennings wrote: > and there is a section labeled "TLS, old and new” which has a table that > lists TLS 1.1 at zero. > > It also references a more specific file at > https://crawler.ninja/files/protocols.txt which currently has the following >

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

Hi Cullen, On Sunday, 10 July 2022 at 11:41, Cullen Jennings wrote: > > On Jul 8, 2022, at 9:37 AM, Thomas Fossati wrote: > > > > I keep an eye on data from a cute crawler [0] that regularly scans > > the top 1 million web sites, and twice per year makes a summary of > > the trends. (You can f

Re: [Uta] [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-09

> On Jul 8, 2022, at 9:37 AM, Thomas Fossati wrote: > > > I keep an eye on data from a cute crawler [0] that regularly scans the > top 1 million web sites, and twice per year makes a summary of the > trends. (You can find the freshly collected raw data [1] as well as the > most recent summary