From Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com Thu Mar 1 10:51:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07AC121E823D for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 10:51:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.195 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.195 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.300, BAYES_50=0.001, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J9suY8pIb9eL for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 10:51:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from oproxy1-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy1.bluehost.com [IPv6:2605:dc00:100:2::a1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1540521E81C2 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 10:50:59 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 9261 invoked by uid 0); 1 Mar 2012 18:50:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box514.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.114) by oproxy1.bluehost.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2012 18:50:59 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kingsmountain.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Subject:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=tmNB27QXHzkU3B3rlVaHyPfAIeteCGUxJ+o3VsHG4PM=; b=eBTsQmeVimCLQ+LoRIl9y/AelsYOOILEb7cYvLRAvBC50H+R69lczF18ymwzenqvDtLC651iCDHWhtnouEyGLnyGJnKnT+fwNUku37A3VEfTGHnu4LXRZtYIQt00hu5n; Received: from [67.218.125.10] (helo=[172.18.54.103]) by box514.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1S3B5e-0004pT-BZ for therightkey@ietf.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 11:50:58 -0700 Message-ID: <4F4FC510.3040103@KingsMountain.com> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 10:50:56 -0800 From: =JeffH User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.27) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/3.1.19 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: therightkey@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Identified-User: {11025:box514.bluehost.com:kingsmou:kingsmountain.com} {sentby:smtp auth 67.218.125.10 authed with jeff.hodges+kingsmountain.com} Subject: [therightkey] fyi: Certificate Transparency: Spec and Working Code X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 18:51:01 -0000 [ note there's a CT-specific mailing list:=20 ] Subject: Spec and Code From: Ben Laurie Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 17:38:18 +0000 To: certificate-transparency@googlegroups.com http://www.links.org/?p=3D1226 "Certificate Transparency: Spec and Working Code Quite a few people have said to me that Certificate Transparency (CT) sounds like a good idea, but they=C2=92d like to see a proper spec. Well, there=C2=92s been one of those for quite a while, you can find the = latest version in the code repository, or for your viewing convenience, I just made an HTML version =2E Today, though, to go with that spec, I=C2=92m happy to announce working code for a subset of the protocol. This covers the trickiest part =C2=96 a fully backwards compatible SSL handshake between servers and clients. The rest = of the protocol will necessarily all be new code for interacting with the lo= g server and other new components, and so should not have these issues. If you build the code according to the README, then you will find instructions in test/README for the demo. What this does, in short, is the following: - Run a CT log server. Currently this has no persistence across runs,= but does keep a full log in memory. - Issue a self-signed server certificate. A CA issued certificate wou= ld also be fine, but not so easy to automate for a demo. - Use the CT client to register that certificate with the log server = and to obtain a log proof for it. - Use the CT client to convert that proof into a fake =C2=93certifica= te=C2=94 which can be included in the certificate chain in the TLS handshake. - Run an Apache 2.2 instance to serve the self-signed certificate and= the log proof certificate. Note that Apache is unmodified, all that i= s needed is appropriate configuration. - Use the CT client to connect to the Apache instance and verify the presented log proof. - You can also connect to Apache with an existing browser to check th= at you can still access the site despite the presence of the log proof. There=C2=92s plenty more to be done, but this is the part that needs the earliest scrutiny, since we are bending the rules to get back compatibili= ty and avoid the need to change server software. Client software has to chan= ge anyway to provide any benefit to users, so that=C2=92s less of a worry. We welcome discussion, suggestions and questions on the mailing list =2E" --- end From tom@ritter.vg Wed Mar 14 07:00:52 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD44D21F870F for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:00:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.847 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.130, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h9N1FxPPC2qE for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:00:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAF7121F84EF for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:00:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by yenm5 with SMTP id m5so2110517yen.31 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:00:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ritter.vg; s=vg; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=F2DGJpZKzuMbnpbI/kqkCwyHQuE16As01+dh5zniqpw=; b=ocj50KaC8PC8Zr/2krU9+8b+2gxVJQ7iQHq90mSb6IfFiqXgDAgy9v0n5RpoihwOMO +XDlzLjtH2u8VPMOP+/UrG+mtNSfEBWb8we18gU5fiq1tktkla8qgzkwhmiRX4Vm9wVT az9gd+nUSXtqtymIO/G/Ej+YfAskBg4zLjjgg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=F2DGJpZKzuMbnpbI/kqkCwyHQuE16As01+dh5zniqpw=; b=HujM4w38hM6EQg+2H/lgbbTD6KjL1RAqDtgle0yxQmIBDOeqjCR/Epjb5J+iEagnjf sPaf4x8K70TelRX0HzNr1KXEUTVm8UtB7maUt8F7stTqCA5A1Q8NU5zkKMqh4uU9G9kV flM3RKIBM2h0OIDUo8CrEf+gySRjHfyNDa0crCWfh4bTrQBcOJIPB6CPOaOscYLykrfR nRn0HP6W4xdTWUZ58lHPRCiD3auJHyZ1zCyVaf8xnN6bKi+QYt5UIQ/i/sha1Hul5qwb TpQUFegCI0GyVeXrbStP1EcETqvWbUk+7SFtezvV0LIldZv7xzIFc+VL4u3uqM2UrVBG +6KA== Received: by 10.60.26.65 with SMTP id j1mr3667853oeg.6.1331733651234; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:00:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.89.98 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 07:00:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom Ritter Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:00:31 -0400 Message-ID: To: therightkey@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnRTUo8dQtm6+OYdYDlExwMcd8MEsl2JxcSV44v7VPfRAjzDbyL4xvXgZAGs4qRTyTRgWuw Subject: [therightkey] Properties of PKI Improvements/Fixes X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:00:52 -0000 I just finished presenting on a survey of improvements to Browsers, TLS and PKI that have happened in the past couple years. It probably won't have anything entirely new to the members of this list, but it might have some small nuggets of info you didn't know about. The outline is below. Something I think is valuable is a collection of properties to remember when evaluating proposals. Copy/Pasted without context: - Bootstrapping Trust is Hard - Security Policy is dictated by the site - Security Policy Anomalies can be reported - Security Policy can be learned & guessed at - Extra Network Trips are bad - Clocks Matter - Ability to change the trusted parties is desirable - Network Perspectives only tells you what others see - Users Don=92t Change Defaults - Privacy Matters - Browsers, Server Operators, CAs =96 who does the work? - Public doesn=92t mean correct=85 it just means public - Going back to basics is useful So we can look at say, Convergence and say "Well, it solves the bootstrapping problem by hardcoding notary keys in the notary bundle, it doesn't give any mechanism for sites to dictate their security policy, nor can anomalies be reported. It uses an extra network request sometimes (but not usually because of caching), doesn't require a clock, and can change the trusted notaries easily. We have a problem with notary uptime and reliability (default hard-coded notaries), and the work is offloaded from sites and CAs. We have notaries that can authenticate on anything, not just public-status - and revocation is handled transparently in most cases." I'm still traveling, so I won't have the best response time, but I'd like to fix any errors in it if you care to point them out to me with your pet project or proposal. -tom Blog: http://ritter.vg/blog-blackhateu_tls.html Whitepaper: http://ritter.vg/p/2012-TLS-Survey.pdf Outline: Introduction Browser Security - Content Security Policy - Caja - Javascript Cryptography - Strict Transport Security - Public Key Pinning - Bootstrapping Trust DNSSEC - DNSSEC-Verified Fingerprints - DNSSEC Trust Chain TLS - TLS Protocol Improvements -- TLS 1.1 -- TLS 1.2 -- TLS Deployment -- TLS Ciphersuites\label{TLS-Ciphersuites -- False Start -- Next Protocol Negotiation - Identity Management in TLS -- Channel Binding -- Origin Bound Certificates -- Using Binding Today -- Secure Remote Password -- Other Identity Management Proposals - More TLS Improvements -- Encrypted Client Certificates -- Datagram TLS -- Minor TLS Additions Public Key Infrastructure - Revocation -- Certificate Revocation Lists -- Online Certificate Status Protocol -- OCSP Stapling -- Revocation Proposals - Certification Authority Authorization - Extensions for Server Operators - Security Policy Learning - CA/Browser Forum - Network Perspectives Based Trust Decisions -- Perspectives -- Convergence -- CrossBear & MECAI - Public Accountability Based Trust Decisions -- Sovereign Keys -- CA Transparency and Auditability - Simple \& Unusual Approaches -- Certificate Patrol -- Certificate Authority Penalties -- MonkeySphere -- YURLs - Concepts of Certificate Authority Enhancements and Replacements From becha@xs4all.nl Fri Mar 23 03:06:12 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A3321F8510 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:06:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.227 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.227 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.277, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7ysmm57vn3BT for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-vbr12.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr12.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CAD321F84F8 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xs8.xs4all.nl (xs8.xs4all.nl [194.109.21.8]) by smtp-vbr12.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2NA50n3018706 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:05:00 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from becha@xs4all.nl) Received: from xs8.xs4all.nl (28329@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xs8.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id q2NA50ZN001814; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:05:00 +0100 Received: from localhost (becha@localhost) by xs8.xs4all.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id q2NA4xIg001810; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:04:59 +0100 Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:04:59 +0100 (CET) From: Vesna Manojlovic To: Stephen Farrell In-Reply-To: <4F46B1B0.2020809@cs.tcd.ie> Message-ID: References: <20120223213019.7A48621F87A2@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F46B1B0.2020809@cs.tcd.ie> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) X-NCC-RegId: eu.zz MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner Cc: "therightkey@ietf.org" Subject: [therightkey] BoF date & time? X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:06:12 -0000 Hi, is there an agreement on the date & time (& place) for the BoF? Thanks, Vesna -- you are free to feel inspired http://blogger.xs4all.nl/becha From stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Fri Mar 23 03:57:35 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E95521F851D for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:57:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hCit3UwDpx8W for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:57:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scss.tcd.ie (hermes.scss.tcd.ie [IPv6:2001:770:10:200:889f:cdff:fe8d:ccd2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42F4521F851C for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 03:57:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hermes.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7461542B0; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:57:28 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version:user-agent:from:date:message-id:received :received:x-virus-scanned; s=cs; t=1332500243; bh=6DJjSgAWdV9hSv NYlB5XXckHjLqnViu0DO0faz1o75E=; b=6bqqVPbdU8U4ZNFzzfB0jYvXRtvOqj XSY9YvmgdijdAZHecGBrUCyYZc+/ArN4KauF/Cl7DW63HkXI7IRgl0wvHVH8k5zM UIGVLfz6GnylubP11k6isPQMpC7ajXWwU6JRRx2WUQ6Ubl4EoVOzllb6LDjZkHj6 /8NLmQgD/59eCIccbcC86lm/beekhAopI5h/LxutwgN0wsC+nQB6ce78l1ylg5eV bXcSKkjLeOoxW6BDTsM/bS2KGgI7DBvbTOVg/P7Z911gIM3Qo53mC+CNrt6P3N52 sSabucXuQWc0VIM096bbZdo7uG1uFEA/SlJ44mQaGnjrqkefo57APoZQ== X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with ESMTP id YxXTLlCeMtpc; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:57:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [IPv6:2001:770:10:203:a288:b4ff:fe9c:bc5c] (unknown [IPv6:2001:770:10:203:a288:b4ff:fe9c:bc5c]) by smtp.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 404F5171CC5; Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:57:23 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4F6C5712.3050106@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:57:22 +0000 From: Stephen Farrell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vesna Manojlovic References: <20120223213019.7A48621F87A2@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F46B1B0.2020809@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "therightkey@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [therightkey] BoF date & time? X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:57:35 -0000 Hiya, On 03/23/2012 10:04 AM, Vesna Manojlovic wrote: > Hi, > > is there an agreement on the date & time (& place) for the BoF? This is no formal BoF this time, but people can still meet informally of course, and it'd be good to see that happen IMO. I've not seen anything concrete for a time/place that I recall. The doodle poll that was started seems to have evaporated. Remember - if folks are really interested in this they ought to be self-organising. That's the best way to get stuff to happen in the IETF - don't wait for "instructions," or you'll be just left waiting:-) So, those interested in meeting in Paris should arrange it themselves. The way to do that is probably to pick a time and place to meet (at the message board is usually a good place). Someone can volunteer to try find a suitable place to talk. (A quiet bar or restaurant, easier done after folks have arrived in Paris, or somewhere in the conference centre if you'll overlap with sessions.) Since there's no social this time, Tuesday evening might be a good time, or during the last slot on Tuesday. (Conflicts with mile, but that's maybe a different set of folks.) Maybe Vesna, you'd like to take the lead on organising that? S. > > Thanks, > Vesna > > -- > you are free to feel inspired > http://blogger.xs4all.nl/becha > From Scott@Digicert.com Tue Mar 27 12:54:10 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A6621E80EC for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:54:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id idT88GdxCe7s for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:54:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.digicert.com (mail.digicert.com [64.78.193.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E028121E80CE for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.211.55.9] (unknown [64.78.193.238]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.digicert.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A77028FA05B for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:54:04 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <4F721ADB.8020207@Digicert.com> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:54:03 -0600 From: Scott Rea User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.3) Gecko/20120306 Thunderbird/10.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: therightkey@ietf.org References: <20120223213019.7A48621F87A2@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F46B1B0.2020809@cs.tcd.ie> <4F6C5712.3050106@cs.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <4F6C5712.3050106@cs.tcd.ie> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [therightkey] BoF date & time? X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 19:54:10 -0000 Was any final decision made on a bar BOF? _Scott On 3/23/2012 4:57 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > Hiya, > > On 03/23/2012 10:04 AM, Vesna Manojlovic wrote: >> Hi, >> >> is there an agreement on the date & time (& place) for the BoF? > > This is no formal BoF this time, but people can still > meet informally of course, and it'd be good to see > that happen IMO. > > I've not seen anything concrete for a time/place that > I recall. The doodle poll that was started seems to > have evaporated. > > Remember - if folks are really interested in this they > ought to be self-organising. That's the best way to > get stuff to happen in the IETF - don't wait for > "instructions," or you'll be just left waiting:-) > > So, those interested in meeting in Paris should > arrange it themselves. > > The way to do that is probably to pick a time and > place to meet (at the message board is usually a > good place). Someone can volunteer to try find a > suitable place to talk. (A quiet bar or restaurant, > easier done after folks have arrived in Paris, or > somewhere in the conference centre if you'll > overlap with sessions.) > > Since there's no social this time, Tuesday evening > might be a good time, or during the last slot on > Tuesday. (Conflicts with mile, but that's maybe a > different set of folks.) > > Maybe Vesna, you'd like to take the lead on > organising that? > > S. > >> >> Thanks, >> Vesna >> >> -- >> you are free to feel inspired >> http://blogger.xs4all.nl/becha >> > _______________________________________________ > therightkey mailing list > therightkey@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey > > -- > Scott Rea From stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Tue Mar 27 23:49:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EAA621E8139 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 23:49:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.862 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.862 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.263, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YCO7h1HJEV0o for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 23:49:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scss.tcd.ie (hermes.scss.tcd.ie [IPv6:2001:770:10:200:889f:cdff:fe8d:ccd2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160AD21E80E7 for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2012 23:49:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hermes.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D6D3171C04; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:49:00 +0100 (IST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version:user-agent:from:date:message-id:received :received:x-virus-scanned; s=cs; t=1332917339; bh=DjsmlXBEWZ79LI 7Zhbwg35xKQHLTbCKdn7CnQHMrQn8=; b=lyerqeRfVuiqb/Z0FxwxuPlSls4e9H Jne+DvLoCJ7UbylItiK7v27PbLI2mfl/5NL+LpeHEhi510S4gG5vHjHZufk/N6Xx iA4lGCo3abvLZazTghtagptDvWJuys4H2TESCjqrylCdox0FKIH4TpVr4NN7rTSy FjfqmVChEJMS0lrypjW34T5Dfrgn6FjAvQlyfSibvhMAVlCf4JS6ABeQ5t8yo1JT FN8GrAB1rmHIQQT+lr7XLLfVH6IAmwenUqiRIR63DBEohZgknSSk6R39jqmNieb1 HLGqpwfG6J91ag0g3iU9IcKqwektdt3vmELWtRO7JF5e6gBk5fRFxfYA== X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with ESMTP id or7O0oop-RCC; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:48:59 +0100 (IST) Received: from [130.129.103.171] (dhcp-67ab.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.103.171]) by smtp.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE3CD171BFD; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:48:59 +0100 (IST) Message-ID: <4F72B45B.4030600@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:48:59 +0100 From: Stephen Farrell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Rea References: <20120223213019.7A48621F87A2@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F46B1B0.2020809@cs.tcd.ie> <4F6C5712.3050106@cs.tcd.ie> <4F721ADB.8020207@Digicert.com> In-Reply-To: <4F721ADB.8020207@Digicert.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: therightkey@ietf.org Subject: Re: [therightkey] BoF date & time? X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 06:49:04 -0000 On 03/27/2012 08:54 PM, Scott Rea wrote: > Was any final decision made on a bar BOF? Nothing that I know of. S > _Scott > > On 3/23/2012 4:57 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote: >> >> Hiya, >> >> On 03/23/2012 10:04 AM, Vesna Manojlovic wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> is there an agreement on the date & time (& place) for the BoF? >> >> This is no formal BoF this time, but people can still >> meet informally of course, and it'd be good to see >> that happen IMO. >> >> I've not seen anything concrete for a time/place that >> I recall. The doodle poll that was started seems to >> have evaporated. >> >> Remember - if folks are really interested in this they >> ought to be self-organising. That's the best way to >> get stuff to happen in the IETF - don't wait for >> "instructions," or you'll be just left waiting:-) >> >> So, those interested in meeting in Paris should >> arrange it themselves. >> >> The way to do that is probably to pick a time and >> place to meet (at the message board is usually a >> good place). Someone can volunteer to try find a >> suitable place to talk. (A quiet bar or restaurant, >> easier done after folks have arrived in Paris, or >> somewhere in the conference centre if you'll >> overlap with sessions.) >> >> Since there's no social this time, Tuesday evening >> might be a good time, or during the last slot on >> Tuesday. (Conflicts with mile, but that's maybe a >> different set of folks.) >> >> Maybe Vesna, you'd like to take the lead on >> organising that? >> >> S. >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Vesna >>> >>> -- >>> you are free to feel inspired >>> http://blogger.xs4all.nl/becha >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> therightkey mailing list >> therightkey@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey >> >> -- >> Scott Rea > _______________________________________________ > therightkey mailing list > therightkey@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey >