Hi Eric, Thanks for preparing this PR. This fixes my concern.
Cheers, Med De : Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> Envoyé : lundi 17 novembre 2025 16:17 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[email protected]> Cc : The IESG <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Objet : Re: [TLS] Mohamed Boucadair's Discuss on draft-ietf-tls-tls13-pkcs1-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 6:42 AM <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Re-, I think there is a disconnect here. My DISCUSS point is clear: how can you make use of draft-ietf-tls-tls13-pkcs without relaxing what is the base spec? And this document does so, regardless of whether 8446 is updated. It permits servers to advertise support and clients to negotiate it. That overrides the text in 8446. Great to hear that you “can clarify this point there in AUTH48”, but that’s not sufficient to clear my DISCUSS. I would appreciate if you can share the proposed change so that we can move on. Thanks. https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/1399/files Please clear your DISCUSS. -Ekr Cheers, Med De : Eric Rescorla <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Envoyé : lundi 17 novembre 2025 15:32 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc : The IESG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Objet : Re: [TLS] Mohamed Boucadair's Discuss on draft-ietf-tls-tls13-pkcs1-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 6:13 AM <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Eric, Hmm. As you ask, this falls under technical/implementation issue as it relates to how the intended feature can provided given the restriction in the bis. I do not agree with this statement. The document is unambiguous on what itallows, and adding an "Updates" field will not make it anymore clear. Moreover, as we've discussed 8446bis is already *ahead* of this document in the queue,and we can clarify this point there in AUTH48. I appreciate that you would prefer a different resolution, but this seems tome to fall rather under the following non-criteria: "Disagreement with informed WG decisions that do not exhibit problems outlined in Section 3.1 (DISCUSS Criteria). In other words, disagreement in preferences among technically sound approaches." as well as: "Pedantic corrections to non-normative text. Oftentimes, poor phrasing or misunderstandings in descriptive text are corrected during IESG review. However, if these corrections are not essential to the implementation of the specification, these should not be blocking comments." Accordingly, I would ask you to remove your discuss and allow this document to proceed. -Ekr Cheers, Med De : Eric Rescorla <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Envoyé : lundi 17 novembre 2025 15:01 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc : The IESG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Objet : Re: [TLS] Mohamed Boucadair's Discuss on draft-ietf-tls-tls13-pkcs1-06: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 1:02 AM Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-tls13-pkcs1-06: Discuss When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-tls13-pkcs1/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi David and Andrei, Thank you for the effort put into this specification. Updated the ballot [1] to take into account the feedback received so far (including off-list clarification from Paul; Thanks). The only pending point is: # Update RFC8446/RFC8446bis The provisions in this draft relax what used to be disallowed in 8446/8446bis. This reads like an update. Specifically, this part from RFC8446bis: and In addition, the signature algorithm MUST be compatible with the key in the sender's end-entity certificate. RSA signatures MUST use an RSASSA-PSS algorithm, regardless of whether RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 algorithms appear in "signature_algorithms". Can you please identify which DISCUSS criteria item you believe this DISCUSS corresponds to? -Ekr ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # FIPS 186-4 ## Please add a reference ## s/with FIPS 186-4/with US FIPS 186-4 # TLS Registries CURRENT: IANA is requested to create the following entries in the TLS SignatureScheme registry, defined in [RFC8446]. Isn’t draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis authoritative here for registry matters? I would replace the 8446 citation with draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis. Cheers, Med [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/dimNOvXqeIaYflBK7s51J43p80U/ _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
