IRC log of crypto on 2015-11-30

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:44:04 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #crypto
19:44:04 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:45:22 [wseltzer]
wseltzer has changed the topic to: Meeting Nov 30, 2000 UTC (3pm Boston)
19:50:29 [hhalpin]
hhalpin has joined #crypto
19:50:32 [hhalpin]
me waves
19:50:48 [jimsch]
jimsch has joined #crypto
19:56:39 [hhalpin]
hhalpin has joined #crypto
19:56:58 [Charles_Engelke]
Charles_Engelke has joined #crypto
19:58:29 [jimsch]
I cannot appear to logon and get the password for the conference call
19:58:46 [hhalpin]
Jim -
19:58:53 [jyates]
jyates has joined #crypto
19:58:54 [hhalpin]
1-617-324-0000 Access Code: 643 244 026
19:59:07 [hhalpin]
Password is member-only link
19:59:39 [wseltzer]
19:59:44 [wseltzer]
19:59:47 [wseltzer]
present+ virginie
19:59:50 [wseltzer]
present+ hhalpin
19:59:55 [wseltzer]
zakim, who is here?
19:59:55 [Zakim]
Present: wseltzer, virginie, hhalpin
19:59:57 [Zakim]
On IRC I see jyates, Charles_Engelke, hhalpin, jimsch, RRSAgent, virginie, Karen, slightlyoff, tobie, timeless, Zakim, trackbot, wseltzer
20:00:00 [wseltzer]
present+ jyates
20:01:00 [wseltzer]
present+ Charles_Engelke
20:02:20 [wseltzer]
present+ jimsch
20:03:38 [wseltzer]
present+ timeless
20:04:17 [wseltzer]
scribenick: wseltzer
20:04:22 [wseltzer]
chair: Virginie
20:04:38 [virginie]
20:04:42 [wseltzer]
virginie: Welcome. We're checking to see whether the spec is ready to progress toward Rec
20:04:56 [kodonog]
kodonog has joined #crypto
20:05:10 [wseltzer]
... Discussion on mailing list over the last few weeks to finalize the WebCrypto API
20:05:19 [virginie]
20:05:20 [wseltzer]
... spec in github repo
20:05:47 [wseltzer]
... Harry, can you share recent changes?
20:06:01 [wseltzer]
hhalpin: some edits to prep for PR
20:06:11 [wseltzer]
... and Jim giving a substantive check
20:06:15 [hhalpin]
pr-edits branch of the git repo
20:06:27 [hhalpin]
1) Normative references
20:06:32 [wseltzer]
... Three edits: fixing normative references
20:06:34 [virginie]
20:06:45 [wseltzer]
... Added a resolution to Akamai's objection
20:06:59 [wseltzer]
... noting the CFRG document on crypto algorithm analysis
20:07:00 [hhalpin]
2) We added a sentence to resolve the Akamai objection, noting the CFRG document which the CFRG has accepted to maintained, added to references
20:07:22 [wseltzer]
... minor things
20:07:30 [hhalpin]
3) Editorial Notes -> Just became part of the spec text
20:07:46 [hhalpin]
Even though support BER encoding, we don't.
20:08:12 [wseltzer]
... text from note was moved to spec
20:08:26 [hhalpin]
4) Some of preamble removed
20:08:31 [wseltzer]
... preamble was removed, where it asked for help
20:08:38 [wseltzer]
... and finally, changing SOTD
20:08:48 [hhalpin]
The last PR -> is to change the status section to match the PR section and to change the CSS
20:09:40 [wseltzer]
... Last issue, I thought we could add a sentence to the algo section saying "if an algo is not in this list, it doesn't mean it's not under consideration, please check proposed algorithm note"
20:09:55 [wseltzer]
... but I wanted to get discussion from WG/editors
20:10:01 [wseltzer]
... or we could put that on the group homepage .
20:10:05 [hhalpin]
Only substantial change to the spec that I would see making before going to PR
20:10:08 [virginie]
20:10:33 [wseltzer]
jimsch: I have a slightly different proposal for dealing with editorial notes
20:10:59 [wseltzer]
... I noted at least one ref to a section in an X9 document that wasn't filled in.
20:11:19 [jimsch]
Let <var>secret</var> be the result of applying the field element to
20:11:19 [jimsch]
<a href="#dfn-octet-string">octet string</a> conversion defined in Section ? of <a href="#X9.63">X9.63</a>
20:11:19 [jimsch]
to the output of the ECDH primitive.
20:12:15 [wseltzer]
q- bal
20:12:36 [wseltzer]
wseltzer: we're looking for a copy of the X9 spec
20:13:03 [hhalpin_]
hhalpin_ has joined #crypto
20:14:04 [selfissued]
selfissued has joined #crypto
20:14:06 [wseltzer]
hhalpin: let's try to get a copy of the spec, and if not, can delete the reference
20:14:49 [hhalpin_]
Not super-happy with deleting reference, but it seems to be the best thing to do if otherwise its unfixable. I would assume Sleevi may have had same issue.
20:14:49 [wseltzer]
virginie: we need to fix that before we move to PR
20:15:25 [wseltzer]
virginie: regarding proposed algorithm note, we don't currently ahve that document
20:15:34 [wseltzer]
... so I don't want to put a dangling link
20:16:03 [wseltzer]
hhalpin: I could write the list, but we'd want someone available to maintain it
20:16:20 [wseltzer]
... Does anyone want to edit?
20:16:39 [wseltzer]
jimsch: there are other documents we could reference instead of X9
20:16:51 [wseltzer]
... there's an IETF ref.
20:16:57 [wseltzer]
hhalpin: sure
20:17:20 [hhalpin_]
X9 - what other document could we reference?
20:17:38 [wseltzer]
hhalpin_: I'll make a "proposed algorithm" page, but won't refer to it in the spec
20:18:16 [wseltzer]
virginie: We need a WG resolution to move to PR
20:18:16 [hhalpin_]
We can make that clear on the homepage, so people who find the spec and are looking for their favorite algorithm, we can at least point them to a document, even if it doesn't have an editor.
20:18:30 [wseltzer]
20:18:39 [jimsch]
Change X9 to RFC6090
20:18:52 [wseltzer]
selfissued: I had thought that issue of IANA registry adding algorithm analysis line would be done
20:18:57 [wseltzer]
hhalpin_: I'll put that in
20:19:04 [wseltzer]
jimsch: I'm willing for it not to exist
20:19:12 [wseltzer]
selfissued: N/A
20:19:18 [hhalpin_]
I'm OK with anything.
20:19:19 [wseltzer]
jimsch: it's ok if the line doesn't exist
20:19:46 [wseltzer]
selfissued: for IANA, it shouldn't be missing a required field, even if the field's value is N/A
20:20:14 [wseltzer]
hhalpin_: 3 options, nothing, N/A, or ref to CFRG document
20:20:21 [wseltzer]
selfissued: nobody objected to N/A
20:20:21 [jimsch]
n/A is fine
20:20:43 [selfissued]
Algorithm Analysis Documents(s): n/a
20:21:24 [virginie]
20:21:24 [selfissued]
Put that line after each of the Specification Document(s) lines in 34.1
20:21:50 [selfissued]
In Section 34.1. JSON Web Signature and Encryption Algorithms Registration
20:24:30 [selfissued]
Refreshing I'm not seeing the edits. Is this expected?
20:24:56 [wseltzer]
jimsch: I want to change one of the editorial issues response
20:25:00 [wseltzer]
20:25:10 [virginie]
20:25:27 [dconnolly]
dconnolly has joined #crypto
20:25:29 [wseltzer]
hhalpin_: we should allow editorial flexibility to deal with minor issues that don't have substantive impact
20:26:07 [selfissued]
20:27:24 [wseltzer]
jimsch: should we send notice of PR to the mailing list?
20:27:28 [wseltzer]
virginie: yes, let's do that
20:27:34 [wseltzer]
s/PR/pull request/
20:27:39 [wseltzer]
20:27:41 [wseltzer]
q- hhalpin_
20:27:44 [wseltzer]
q- hhalpin
20:27:51 [wseltzer]
ack selfissued
20:28:31 [wseltzer]
selfissued: I had thought the current editors' draft was at the "latest" link in the CR
20:29:08 [wseltzer]
action: hhalpin to change the ED link in mercurial to point to github
20:29:08 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-154 - Change the ed link in mercurial to point to github [on Harry Halpin - due 2015-12-07].
20:29:14 [hhalpin_]
20:29:16 [jimsch]
Is there a version that gets rebuilt automatically on github?
20:30:17 [wseltzer]
selfissued: the call for review should contain a link to arendered version of the document with PR edits
20:30:27 [hhalpin_]
20:31:06 [jimsch]
Let's make a file that has the link to the rendered document.
20:31:46 [wseltzer]
wseltzer: we'll make sure when we send the minutes there's a rendered version to include a pointer
20:31:47 [hhalpin_]
I'll have to set-up up gh-pages or make a standalone rendered version
20:31:53 [hhalpin_]
No problem doing that.
20:31:57 [wseltzer]
selfissued: please point to both github and rendered version
20:33:08 [wseltzer]
virginie: provided that we have a link to rendered version, that we fix X9 links, that we allow editors to make non-substantive changes, and ask editor about link to "proposed algorithm"
20:33:36 [wseltzer]
PROPOSED: That we move the WebCrypto API to Proposed Recommendation
20:33:52 [selfissued]
selfissued has joined #crypto
20:33:54 [wseltzer]
... as found at
20:33:57 [hhalpin_]
"Move the WebCrypto API [at] to Proposed Recommendation with the ability of the editors to make minor changes as needed.
20:34:06 [hhalpin_]
But Wendy's its a bit more straightforward.
20:34:11 [selfissued]
Please include both a link to a rendered version and the github branch in the review e-mail
20:34:20 [jimsch]
harry - are you going to approve your pull request or are you going to wait for an editor to do it?
20:34:44 [hhalpin_]
I'm going to give the editor a few more days, I see no reason to rush
20:34:45 [wseltzer]
virginie: if you agree, +1, disagree, -1
20:34:49 [dconnolly]
20:34:50 [virginie]
20:34:52 [jimsch]
20:34:53 [Charles_Engelke]
20:34:55 [hhalpin_]
The important thing is to start the clock!
20:34:56 [selfissued]
20:34:56 [hhalpin_]
20:35:38 [wseltzer]
virginie: Sounds like consensus here. We submit to 2-week review on mailing list, and if no objection there, then 14 December, move to PR
20:35:54 [wseltzer]
... Thank you for your work
20:35:59 [wseltzer]
... Anything else to discuss?
20:36:00 [virginie]
20:36:04 [hhalpin_]
Just find that IETF reference for me ASAP Jimsch :)
20:36:15 [jimsch]
harry - it is in the log
20:36:31 [wseltzer]
RESOLVED: That we move the WebCrypto API to Proposed Recommendation, as found at
20:36:57 [wseltzer]
virginie: in the meantime, if you find editors for the Proposed Algorithms note, please let us know.
20:36:59 [kodonog]
+1 (didnt't hit return)
20:37:11 [wseltzer]
... No further calls planned, but keep working by email.
20:37:15 [wseltzer]
20:37:26 [wseltzer]
... Don't hesitate to use mailing list.
20:38:00 [selfissued]
What's the e-mail list you referenced, Wendy?
20:38:18 [wseltzer] (Web Security IG), selfissued
20:38:37 [wseltzer]
virginie: thank you all
20:39:40 [wseltzer]
i/public-web-security/wseltzer: For further W3C discussions on Web Security, see the Web Security IG,, and discussion of draft charters for Web Authentication and Hardware-Based Security
20:39:47 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, draft minutes
20:39:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wseltzer
20:40:03 [wseltzer]
present+ kodonog
20:40:17 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, make logs team
20:40:20 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, make logs public
20:40:23 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, draft minutes
20:40:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wseltzer
20:40:44 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, draft minutes
20:40:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wseltzer
20:41:53 [wseltzer]
s/ (Web Security IG), selfissued/wseltzer: (Web Security IG)/
20:41:56 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, draft minutes
20:41:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wseltzer
20:42:37 [wseltzer]
trackbot, end meeting
20:42:37 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
20:42:37 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been wseltzer, virginie, hhalpin, jyates, Charles_Engelke, jimsch, timeless, kodonog
20:42:45 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
20:42:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
20:42:46 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
20:42:46 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in :
20:42:46 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: hhalpin to change the ED link in mercurial to point to github [1]
20:42:46 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
20:47:30 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #crypto
20:47:30 [RRSAgent]
logging to
20:47:41 [wseltzer]
Meeting: WebCrypto WG
20:47:45 [wseltzer]
rrsagent, draft minutes
20:47:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate wseltzer
20:48:23 [timeless]
s|n/A is fine|n/a is fine
20:49:43 [wseltzer]
s/Wendy's its/Wendy's is/
20:50:12 [timeless]
20:51:12 [timeless]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:51:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate timeless
20:51:34 [timeless]
20:51:46 [timeless]
s/me waves//
20:52:31 [wseltzer]
s/I cannot appear to logon and get the password for the conference call//
20:52:48 [wseltzer]
s|Jim -||
20:52:56 [timeless]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:52:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate timeless