On 09/12/15 10:43, tom p. wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 11:30 AM >> >> Hiya, >> >> On 07/12/15 11:23, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >>> I think there's a piece of backstory here I'm not getting.... >>> >>> Den 04. des. 2015 18:05, skrev The IESG: >>>> The protocols in scope are Secure Shell (SSH), DNSSEC, PKIX, CMS, > XML >>>> Digital Signatures and potentially Kerberos and JSON. >>> >>> Why is TLS not included? >>> >>> It seems likely that the answer is one of: >>> >>> 1) TLS is already up-to-date in the space this group is limited to >>> 2) TLS work is being done in the TLS working group >> >> The latter, and a bit of the former:-) > > There is also an active SSH list (albeit only about 5 message p.d. > lately which would barely be noticed on the TLS list:-( and Simon has > posted a message to the curdle list identifying some of that work; and > you yourself have posted to it so you know about it! > > Conversely, I do not see most of those active on the SSH yet taking part > in curdle (nor do I see any mention of curdle on the SSH list). Good point. I'll do that now. > > Setting up this WG to look at SSH would seem divisive and unlikely to > gain any meaningful momentum. I don't get what you mean. AFAIK, there's no current proposal to re-form an SSH working group. There is some chat on the list along those lines but I didn't interpret that as indicating that folks want to do a new WG. (If they did, I'd be happy to assist in getting that done.) > > I do think that the Security Area should be reaching out far more to > other areas to pro-actively provide guidance but do not think that this > proposal has got it quite right. Again, I'm not sure what you mean, can you clarify? Ta, S. > > Tom Petch > >>> >>> In both cases, it would be nice to say so in the charter. >> >> The charter text tries to do that generically but does mention >> TLS specifically in this bit: >> >> "Where there is an IETF working group or area group with expertise > in >> a relevant topic the CURDLE working group will defer to the >> consensus of the more specific working group as to where work will >> be done. For example, the TLS, OpenPGP and IPSECME WGs are actively >> considering some of these topics. " >> >> Cheers, >> S. >> >> >>> >> > >