On 19/01/2012 09:45, Brian Trammell wrote:
Hi Alexey,
Hi Brian,
Thanks for helping me work through these... one more round on open issues,
inline below:
On Jan 18, 2012, at 6:43 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
Hi Brian,
On 18/01/2012 16:16, Brian Trammell wrote:
On Jan 18, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
On 17/01/2012 10:16, Brian Trammell wrote:
On Jan 14, 2012, at 9:45 PM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
RID systems MUST use TLS version 1.1 [RFC4346] or higher with mutual
authentication for transport confidentiality, identification, and
Do you mean that a RID client must use X.509 certificates?
Well, each RID system (HTTP client or server) is identified by an X.509 certificate
(hence "mutual"); how can I make this clearer?
authentication, as in [RFC2818].
I find the whole sentence to be confusing. Note that the rules of RFC 6125 for
certificate verification are stricter than in RFC 2818 and this sentence can be
read as conflicting with the paragraph below which requires use of RFC 6125.
What are you trying to say here?
The intention here is "Use current best practices as would be supported by off-the-shelf
HTTP/1.1 and TLS 1.1 implementations to provide mutual authentication." "Current best
practices", however, seems to be something of a moving target.
I cite 2818 as it is the current binding between HTTP/1.1 and TLS. I cite 6125
solely for certificate verification.
How about something like this:
OLD:
RID systems MUST use TLS version 1.1 [RFC4346] or higher with mutual
authentication for transport confidentiality, identification, and
authentication, as in [RFC2818].
NEW:
RID systems MUST use HTTP over TLS as specified in [RFC2818], with the
exception
of server TLS identity verification which is detailed below.
Ah. Okay, now I understand the issue...
This is only one of them...
RID systems MUST use TLS version 1.1 [RFC4346] or higher with mutual
X.509 authentication. TLS provides for transport confidentiality,
identification, and authentication.
The language has changed in -07 to the following; would this be acceptable?
RID systems MUST use TLS version 1.1 [RFC4346] or higher with mutual
authentication for confidentiality, identification, and
authentication, as in [RFC2818],
Part of the issue with this text is that reads as if "mutual authentication" results in
"confidentiality, identification and authentication". TLS does, that is why I split the
sentence into multiple. Also RFC 2818 is a wrong reference because it doesn't even mention
confidentiality.
I am hoping this is not nitpicking, but I think using simpler sentences clearer.
Absolutely.
when transporting RID messages over
HTTPS.
The rest looks good to me:
RID systems MUST use mutual authentication; that is, both RID
systems acting as HTTPS clients and RID systems acting as HTTPS
servers MUST be identified by an X.509 certificate [RFC5280]. Mutual
authentication requires full path validation on each certificate, as
defined in [RFC5280].
So, how about the following:
RID systems MUST use TLS version 1.1 [RFC4346] or higher for
confidentiality, identification, and authentication, as in
Section 2 of [RFC2818].
I am Ok with your latest proposal, but if you want to make me
super-happy ;-), I suggest you make "as in Section 2 ..." a separate
sentence (E.g. "Use of HTTP over TLS is specified in Section 2...", or
at least insert the word "specified" after "as".
RID systems MUST use mutual authentication;
that is, both RID systems acting as HTTPS clients and RID systems
acting as HTTPS servers MUST be identified by an X.509 certificate
[RFC5280]. Mutual authentication requires full path validation on
each certificate, as defined in [RFC5280].
Many thanks, best regards,
Thanks for working with me on this.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
