I don't really think this is a useful erratum against 5246; the note there is providing an explanation for why certain values are not used (and should not be used). But, now, and even at the time 5246 was published, 0x001e *is* used, and there's no reason to mention it in this context. One could perhaps argue that 2712 should have noted that a value was being reused (or have not reused the value at all), and an errata report against 2712 to add a new appendix section might be reasonable.
So, absent additional considerations, I plan to reject this report. -Ben On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 04:01:35PM +0200, Eugène Adell wrote: > Hello, > > I had some doubts whether it was technical or editorial, and I have looked > at some accepted errata to choose (maybe not the best method) . I thought > it was technical, because one cipher suite was replaced by another one, and > the note already existing gives their numbers, which is a technical > information. > > Although the "mistake" first appears in RFC2712 draft 01, RFC2246 final > release was published before the final RFC2712. > RFC2246 is obsoleted but mentions Fortezza, which RFC2712 doesn't. RFC5246 > being the only non obsoleted child of RFC2246 mentionning the Fortezza > group, it looked more natural to suggest the errata at this place instead > of RFC2712 which is fully dedicated to Kerberos. > > > best regards > Eugène > > > > Le mar. 26 juin 2018 à 15:21, Sean Turner <s...@sn3rd.com> a écrit : > > > First, I think this is editorial. After all these years, I’m not really > > sure it’s an interop problem. > > > > Second, if I were making this I would have placed the errata against > > RFC2712 where the values were assigned. It’s not really TLS1.2’s place to > > clear this up. > > > > spt > > > > > On Jun 26, 2018, at 08:28, RFC Errata System <rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5246, > > > "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2". > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > You may review the report below and at: > > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5409 > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > Type: Technical > > > Reported by: Eugene Adell <eugene.ad...@gmail.com> > > > > > > Section: Appendix A.5 > > > > > > Original Text > > > ------------- > > > Note: The cipher suite values { 0x00, 0x1C } and { 0x00, 0x1D } are > > > reserved to avoid collision with Fortezza-based cipher suites in > > > SSL 3. > > > > > > Corrected Text > > > -------------- > > > Note: The cipher suite values { 0x00, 0x1C } and { 0x00, 0x1D } are > > > reserved to avoid collision with Fortezza-based cipher suites in > > > SSL 3. The cipher suite value { 0x00, 0x1E } firstly also assigned to > > > Fortezza has been released and has since been be reassigned. > > > > > > Notes > > > ----- > > > RFC 2712 (Addition of Kerberos Cipher Suites to Transport Layer > > Security) in its Draft 01 version introduces three new cipher suites > > colliding with the three Fortezza ones. The Draft 02 version partially > > corrects that, by moving the Kerberos cipher suites values by two. > > > This omission of the third cipher suite has never been corrected, and > > this remains in the same state in the final RFC 2712, RFC 2246 and its > > successors including this one. > > > > > > Changing the first Kerberos cipher suite value, or moving all of them, > > would now not make any sense. Enhancing the note as suggested is probably > > enough to mention how one Fortezza cipher suite disappeared. > > > > > > Instructions: > > > ------------- > > > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > > > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > > > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > > > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > RFC5246 (draft-ietf-tls-rfc4346-bis-10) > > > -------------------------------------- > > > Title : The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol > > Version 1.2 > > > Publication Date : August 2008 > > > Author(s) : T. Dierks, E. Rescorla > > > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > > > Source : Transport Layer Security > > > Area : Security > > > Stream : IETF > > > Verifying Party : IESG > > > > _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
