Hi Eric,

Our goal is to have an RFC published as Informational and with the Not 
Recommended status.  We felt having this approved through the IETF process vs 
just ISE would be beneficial to those wishing to adopt, and getting community 
review is also helpful to us and those we represent.

I suppose one question is whether or not we need this to be a WG item or if we 
can solicit independent shepherding from a chair or AD to get to the goal of an 
Information RFC with Not Recommended status.

Also, I apologize if I’ve misunderstood or misstated anything, I’m new to the 
IETF processes so certainly could have made a mistake.

Thanks,

--Jack

From: Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 5:53 PM
To: Jack Visoky <jmvis...@ra.rockwell.com>
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [TLS] Authentication Only Ciphersuites RFC


[Use caution with links & attachments]




On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 12:54 PM Jack Visoky 
<jmvis...@ra.rockwell.com<mailto:jmvis...@ra.rockwell.com>> wrote:

TLS Colleagues,

If you recall we discussed a draft for authentication only ciphersuites over 
email back in August of 2018.  We've since made some updates to that draft.  We 
also have gotten IANA assignments to the authentication only ciphersuites for 
TLS 1.3 and have updated the draft to reflect the new assignments.

To that extent, as the IoT community is looking to adopt these ciphersuites, we 
would like to solicit review of the draft:



    https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-camwinget-tls-ts13-macciphersuites-02



and request that it be published as informational draft given that the IoT 
forums are looking to adopt its use and the draft can serve as the guide for 
use and interoperability.

It seems to me that there four somewhat distinct questions:

1. Code points
2. Document level (Info, Exp, PS, etc.)
3. Recommended status
4. WG status

From my perspective, you have code points and you've asked for an Informational 
document, but than can only get you Not Recommended, so what's the value of 
having this be a WG document? Why can't you submit it to the ISE or alternately 
just have people reference the draft?

-Ekr


Thanks and Best Regards,

--Jack (and Nancy)


_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org<mailto:TLS@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to