On Tue, 16 Oct 2018, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
That said, it sounds like negotiating the details of how to do this pinning is the main blocker, and i'm sick of this proposal being blocked (because i want it for "greenfield" implementations last year).
Imagine how sick I will be when I try to do this later in a separate docment, where the WG might not even accept it as a WG item. I am not confident enough that pinning would be resolved in a later document at all, leaving me with my use case dead in the water forever. So for me it is useful to have the pressure of release for those people who have a greenfield application to want this to happen to push for resolving the downgrade attack. It forces the parties to the table to resolve the conflict. But also, we already had a suggestion on how to postpone the pinning solution to another document, but to do that sanely this document needed some placeholder or else you end up with a pinning extension that pins itself _and_ another extension, or a placeholder for the meaning of a pin, and both situations were deemed worse then just working out everything in one document. So in effect we already tried what you are proposing. Finally, as Viktor said, our discussions offlist an onlist, found other issues. While Viktor and I are happy to write text to fix these other issues in the document, it seems we are currently stuck in a role of spending a lot of effort writing text, only to see no new draft version on even the things everyone agrees on, such as denial of existence. Since Viktor and I put in a lot of effort to write text that isn't being accepted or rejected, we don't feel very motivated to fix all these other things we found. In my opinion, this document needs more active authors proposing and writing text. It seems none of the original authors is willing or able to do this anymore. If nothing has changed at the next IETF, I have planned to propose adding one or two new authors to the document to try and get it unstuck. I also want to note that Ben has done a very admirable job of talking to everyone and moving towards consensus. Paul _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
