[saag] Re: draft-paulwh-crypto-components-02
Stephen Farrell <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.saag |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hiya, On 11/02/2025 21:33, Paul Hoffman wrote: > More reviews are welcome. I think section 3.4 needs a bit more work. The IRTF (mostly CFRG) fairly frequently creates registries which is sorta mentioned here, but also ignored some, e.g. in the first para, 2nd sentence, which is a bit misleading given that that RG does not need IETF consensus. I guess CFRG could publish an RFC with a registry that requires an RFC, which isn't really covered here. (Not sure if it's worth a mention.) And of course, while it'd be pretty odd, CFRG could create an initially empty registry that calls for IETF consensus for adding entries. (Or maybe even not initially empty?) I don't think it'd be worthwhile trying to figure out how to "govern" creation of IANA registries by CFRG along the lines above, but I do think it'd be good to spend time to figure out how to hand-over work from CFRG to the IETF, when that's what really should happen. RFC9180 is the main example I have in mind but there're probably more cases, where it was a fine plan to do initial work in CFRG but where subsequently moving maintenance to the IETF would be an even better plan. The reason to mention this is that if such an improved understanding between the IETF SEC area and CFRG could be reached, then I figure that would result in changes to this text. (And well, it's also a thing that's overdue, given the workload and latency involved in CFRG work, which isn't really conducive to maintenance activities.) As a near-nit: the new bit of text saying IETF consensus is good for 'anything other than "MAY"' needs to be reworded - the relevant TLS registries have Y/N values. SSH does have a column with MAY or SHOULD or MUST values, which is currently a thing generating debate so I'm not sure adding that now is so good an idea, but I'm not objecting. (FWIW, while I don't agree with the 'anything other than MAY' recommendation myself, the surrounding text clarifying that everything here can and likely will see relatively common exceptions, makes that kinda harmless, so it's ok, even if not what I'd write.) Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ saag mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
OpenPGP_signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 236 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wnsEABYIACMWIQQwbnhHy1kPJkWsM6fk2On5l6gz3QUCZ6vMEQUDAAAAAAAKCRDk2On5l6gz3W/H AQDx8vJbAPLqr0aXp+NsNSJvITKVaQhJ50+7cQf1rHzcBAD/UO/RFyUoGGI/Fsj8WN0a0GsbmN1N ZgaccxloKAWk+Q8= =YKS8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----