I think the current working group consensus for the policy of the recommended column is reflected in the following statement:
Setting a value to "Y" or "D" in the "Recommended" column requires IETF Standards Action [RFC8126 <#RFC8126>]. Any state transition to or from a "Y" or "D" value requires IESG Approval." On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 12:49 PM Salz, Rich <rsalz= 40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > It is not hard to see that e.g., NULL encryption violates the properties. > > > > Sure. And for years we thought MD5 met the properties, until it didn’t. > And now, RSA meets the properties, until it doesn’t. > > > > The alternative is that someone afterwards need to write a standards track > draft and progress that through IETF. As an author of such a draft I would > rather not have do that work. I would much rather help evaluating if an > item violates the properties before registration. > > > > That’s better than trusting security to a handful of people. I mean, if > you’re making a judgement that global security needs to move away from an > algorithm, having to get a document through standards track seems a very > small price to pay. > > > > I don’t want that job, and I’d quit if the TLS registries were changed > that way. I don’t think it’s likely. > _______________________________________________ > 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
