Re: I intend to have a document ready for Atlanta on this subject.

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <5.1.0.14.2.20021003205924.01d38320@popd.ix.netcom.com>, Richard Sho
ckey writes:
>
>One . I certainly support another BOF on the subject.
>
>Two I will have a draft ready on the use of DDDS and NAPTR records for the
>discovery of public keys and other cryptographic materials shortly.
>

Jeff Schiller and I agree that there should be a BoF.  But it's worth
some discussion on just what the subject should be.  The proposal we
thought we were agreeing to is for IPsec keys, and in particular keys for
opportunistic encryption.  A general key storage scheme -- the subject
of SIKED -- is a much more difficult topic.  It would take quite a bit
of effort to persuade me that there was reason for a second BoF on that
topic at this time

The current philosophy of the IESG is for working groups to be narrowly
focused and -- with luck -- short-lived.  That requires a clear problem
statement and a clear charter.  If people want a BoF for IPsec keys in
the DNS, there's no problem; Jeff and I will approve it.  But whoever is
interested in organizing such a BoF should see
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1bof-procedures.txt, draw up a description and
agenda, and send it to the Secretariat, cc'ing Jeff and me.

		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
		http://www.wilyhacker.com ("Firewalls" book)