DNS-based Authentication of Named Entities
charter-ietf-dane-02
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2015-10-14
|
02 | (System) | Notify list changed from ogud@ogud.com, warren@kumari.net to (None) |
2014-06-13
|
02 | Cindy Morgan | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-02.txt |
2014-06-13
|
01-07 | Cindy Morgan | State changed to Approved from IESG review |
2014-06-13
|
01-07 | Cindy Morgan | IESG has approved the charter |
2014-06-13
|
01-07 | Cindy Morgan | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2014-06-13
|
01-07 | Cindy Morgan | Closed "Ready for external review" ballot |
2014-06-13
|
01-07 | Cindy Morgan | WG action text was changed |
2014-06-13
|
01-07 | Cindy Morgan | New version to fix line breaks plus one typo. |
2014-06-13
|
01-07 | Cindy Morgan | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-07.txt |
2014-06-13
|
01-06 | Cindy Morgan | WG action text was changed |
2014-06-13
|
01-06 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-06.txt |
2014-06-13
|
01-05 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-05.txt |
2014-06-13
|
01-04 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-04.txt |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Pete Resnick | [Ballot comment] Leftover bits: OLD The WG will specify such mechanisms for SMTP, SMIME, OPENPGP, and IPSEC. NEW The … [Ballot comment] Leftover bits: OLD The WG will specify such mechanisms for SMTP, SMIME, OPENPGP, and IPSEC. NEW The WG will specify the use of DANE for protocols that use SRV to express service location. The WG will specify DANE use for SMTP, SMIME, OPENPGP, IPSEC and and other base electronic mail protocols such as (IMAP or POP) END Possible addition: as well as any other protocol that does not have a working group. OLD The DANE working group will also assist other working groups with adding DANE functionality to their work. When work on the work items enumerated above is complete, the WG may re-charter if sufficiently pressing new work is identified. NEW END (The first sentence above was supposed to be deleted. The second sentence appears twice; some cut/paste error.) And while you're at it, re-wrap the first paragraph. |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Pete Resnick | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Pete Resnick |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Alia Atlas | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alia Atlas |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Alissa Cooper | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Adrian Farrel | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adrian Farrel |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Joel Jaeggli | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Joel Jaeggli |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Benoît Claise | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Benoit Claise |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Kathleen Moriarty | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Ted Lemon | [Ballot comment] It would be nice if you could fix the formatting at the top, but aside from that I have no objection. |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Ted Lemon | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Lemon |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Brian Haberman | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Brian Haberman |
2014-06-12
|
01-03 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-03.txt |
2014-06-12
|
01-02 | Barry Leiba | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Barry Leiba |
2014-06-12
|
01-02 | Spencer Dawkins | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins |
2014-06-12
|
01-02 | Stephen Farrell | [Ballot comment] Oops. I changed this to IESG review since I hope we just approve it today, but that reset the ballot. (I think I … [Ballot comment] Oops. I changed this to IESG review since I hope we just approve it today, but that reset the ballot. (I think I only have Pete's comment to handle and will do that but let me know if I'm skipping something) Apologies. |
2014-06-12
|
01-02 | Stephen Farrell | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Stephen Farrell |
2014-06-12
|
01-02 | Stephen Farrell | Created "Approve" ballot |
2014-06-12
|
01-02 | Stephen Farrell | State changed to IESG review from Internal review |
2014-06-11
|
01-02 | Richard Barnes | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Richard Barnes |
2014-06-10
|
01-02 | Alissa Cooper | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper |
2014-06-10
|
01-02 | Pete Resnick | [Ballot comment] I thought we were skipping external review? Is the ballot just wrong? Not quite worth a block, but I do think these changes … [Ballot comment] I thought we were skipping external review? Is the ballot just wrong? Not quite worth a block, but I do think these changes should be made: The DANE WG will process documents that describe how to incorporate DANE and DANE-like functionality in protocols, and mechanisms to facilitate adoption of this functionality. Instead: "The DANE WG will specify how to incorporate DANE and DANE-like functionality into protocols." Also, specify the list (given that below it says no new items without rechartering): "The WG will specify such mechanisms for SMTP, SMIME, OPENPGP, and IPSEC." (It's not clear to me if the SRV document fits in this category.) The DANE working group will also assist other working groups with adding DANE functionality to their work. How does that differ from the above? In addition the working group will monitor and provide guidance to operators and tool developers. Strike that, or make it something the WG can actually accomplish like, "The DANE WG shall also produce a set of implementation guidance for operators and tool developers." When work on currently chartered documents is complete the WG may re-charter if sufficiently pressing new work is identified. Instead: "When work on the work items enumerated above is complete, the WG may re-charter if sufficiently pressing new work is identified." DANE is not intended to be a long-lived catch-all WG for all PKI in DNS issues and so will generally not adopt new work items without re-chartering. Peachy. And the Problem Statement is fine; it's just descriptive, AFAICT. |
2014-06-10
|
01-02 | Pete Resnick | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Pete Resnick |
2014-06-09
|
01-02 | Spencer Dawkins | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins |
2014-06-09
|
01-02 | Martin Stiemerling | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Martin Stiemerling |
2014-06-05
|
01-02 | Brian Haberman | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Brian Haberman |
2014-06-05
|
01-02 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jari Arkko |
2014-06-05
|
01-02 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-02.txt |
2014-06-05
|
01-01 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-01.txt |
2014-06-04
|
01-00 | Adrian Farrel | [Ballot comment] These issues are nits. I'd love for them to be fixed, but they are not so important... Although those skilled in the art … [Ballot comment] These issues are nits. I'd love for them to be fixed, but they are not so important... Although those skilled in the art may know what "DANE and DANE-like functionality" is, I think the charter would do well to set this out in the first sentence such as: DANE is a set of mechanisms and techniques that allow Internet applications to establish cryptographically secured communications by using information distributed through DNSSEC for discovering and authenticating public keys which are associated with a service located at a domain name. There are three instances of "The group may..." (the last three paragraphs. I understand the desire to encourage the WG to do things and to be clear that doing them is not out of scope, but I wish that there was a stronger directive to do stuff or that it was simply left off the charter. |
2014-06-04
|
01-00 | Adrian Farrel | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adrian Farrel |
2014-05-29
|
01-00 | Kathleen Moriarty | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty |
2014-05-28
|
01-00 | Ted Lemon | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Lemon |
2014-05-22
|
01-00 | Barry Leiba | [Ballot comment] Editorial (bad grammar, and very hard to read): OLD DANE supports both Certificates and raw keys, further more Certificates … [Ballot comment] Editorial (bad grammar, and very hard to read): OLD DANE supports both Certificates and raw keys, further more Certificates and raw keys can be either the full key or a hash of the key. NEW DANE supports both certificates and raw keys. Furthermore, the keys (raw, or imbedded in certificates) can be full keys or hashes of keys. END Though, really, I think the sentence could just as well be removed as fixed. |
2014-05-22
|
01-00 | Barry Leiba | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Barry Leiba |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Stephen Farrell |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | WG action text was changed |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | WG review text was changed |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Created "Ready for external review" ballot |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | State changed to Internal review from Informal IESG review |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Recharter or close down", due November 2015 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE RFC6698 and DANE SRV RFC to Internet Standard", due September 2015 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE reverse binding (server to client) document to IESG", due June 2015 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE IPSEC document to IESG", due May 2015 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE security model document to IESG", due January 2015 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE operational guidance/errata document to IESG", due September 2014 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE OPENPGP document to IESG", due August 2014 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE SMIME document to IESG", due August 2014 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE SMTP document to IESG", due June 2014 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Added charter milestone "Advance DANE SRV document to IESG", due June 2014 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Notification list changed to ogud@ogud.com, warren@kumari.net |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Responsible AD changed to Stephen Farrell |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2014-06-12 |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | Suggest this doesn't need external review. |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | State changed to Informal IESG review from Approved |
2014-05-20
|
01-00 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01-00.txt |
2010-12-10
|
01 | (System) | New version available: charter-ietf-dane-01.txt |