Hi Folks. This isn't a topic for this working group list. Please take the discussion elsewhere.
Thanks, Joe On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 12:41 PM Tony Rutkowski <rutkowski.t...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > Amusing attempt to rewrite history. Your disagreement means nothing, > fortunately, and folks can claim FUD all they want. > > The reality is that the actions in this group are facing increasing > exposure to antitrust, tort, consumer protection, and tax-related > actions. If you don't want to be cautious, then lawyer up...or at least > get ISOC to buy you more insurance. :-) Oh, is it clear who is covered > by the insurance? > > cheers, > tony > > > On 2020-03-08 12:59 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > > On 08/03/2020 16:35, Tony Rutkowski wrote: > >> Stephen, > >> > >> It is not false. > > We disagree. SDNS != TLS. TLS was SSL with the middle > > S standing for socket, which wasn't part of SDNS or > > GOSIP that I recall. > > > >> It is simply largely unknown because of subsequent > >> IETF related narratives that choose to omit the history. The documents > >> are available online - although portions remain classified. > > Hah, that's funny. And with the classified documents > > defense of the falsehood, I'm done debunking this. > > > > S. > > > >> A request > >> is pending for their declassification and release. You can find some of > >> the details in the links in this article. > >> > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20190124_creating_tls_the_pioneering_role_of_ruth_nelson/ > >> > >> > >> Ruth Nelson - who led some of the important components - appeared at > >> last October's NSA Crypto History Symposium. She filled in some of the > >> details and the work was recognized by those there. Whit was also there > >> also there and gave a great presentation. Unfortunately, women in this > >> field seem not to get the credit they deserve. > >> > >> --tony > >> > >> > >> On 2020-03-08 10:56 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > >>> On 08/03/2020 14:46, Tony Rutkowski wrote: > >>>> TLS is particular has a history going back to 1986 when the platform > was > >>>> first announced by the USG and the TLS specification was instantiated > >>>> initially in the GOSIP standards and then in ITU/ISO standards. > >>> That's false. I've seen it repeated a few times but it > >>> remains false. Mostly, this falsehood seems to be repeated > >>> in tandem with efforts one could interpret as attempts > >>> to create FUD about Internet related security. > >>> > >>> TLS started in the IETF as a compromise between Netscape > >>> and Microsoft proposals for how to secure HTTP. > >>> > >>> X.509 started as part of X.400, then X.500 and is used by > >>> TLS. Today, I would bet almost all implementers never need > >>> to look beyond RFC5280 for X.509. And I hope it stays that > >>> way until we somehow figure out how to retire X.509. > >>> > >>> S. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> TLS mailing list > >>> TLS@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
