[TLS] Straw poll on TLS SRP status

[<Pasi.Eronen at nokia.com>]

Folks,

The one remaining issue with TLS SRP is its intended status (Proposed
Standard, Informational, or Experimental). I and Eric think we need
more data to determine consensus here, so this message starts a
two-week straw poll on this issue. (Our apologies that this has 
taken so long; this poll should have been some time ago already.)

The question is: Do you support advancing draft-ietf-tls-srp as 
Proposed Standard? 

   [ ] Yes.
   [ ] I think Informational/Experimental is better.
   [ ] I don't care about the status, just get it published.
   [ ] Something else, please state:

You may reply either on the list, or privately to the chairs.

Some points you may wish to consider, summarizing some of the
arguments made earlier:

- The document describing SRP-3 (not exactly the same 
  algorithm as here), RFC 2945, is Proposed Standard.

- At least the following IPR disclosures may be relevant:

  https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?&ipr_id=25
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?&ipr_id=31
  https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_detail_show.cgi?&ipr_id=63

- Previously some WG members have argued that documents that 
  have IPR with non-royalty-free terms should go Informational
  or Experimental. We have at least one such IPR disclosure 
  (the last one listed above).

- There are several implementations of the draft: see e.g.
  http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg01228.html

- Regardless of what status will be chosen, the RFC will 
  not be compatible with any of those implementations
  (since the TLS extension number will change).

Note that we need rough consensus to go for Proposed Standard; 
if there's significant disagreement, we go Informational or
Experimental.

Best regards,
Pasi & Eric

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls