Metadata Distribution Subcommittee of TAC

[Ian Young <>]

On 22 Aug 2013, at 19:28, Joe St Sauver 
<>
 wrote:

> Scott helped me out by sharing this URL for the latest draft:
> 
>  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-young-md-query/
> 
> I feel better that it only popped out August 16th (my perenial
> nightmare is that there's a huge stream of new protocols floating
> downstream, and I've missed a key cupfull of content from that 
> flood as I crouch by the edge of the bank :-))

It's actually not new at all, but recently revived from an expired I-D that 
Chad put together about three years ago.  That original draft expired because 
there wasn't much interest from deployers outside the Shibboleth project at 
the time.  This I-D is essentially the draft-lajoie-md-query-01 with some 
boilerplate changes only, to act as the base document for a new cycle of work 
(hopefully not a long one).  The immediate impetus is the REEP deployment, 
which is intended to be an implementation of this.

> That said, reading through the text of that draft, here's my 
> quick reactions (as a non-insider/explicityly unclued outsider):

Even without looking at the individual points in any detail, I can say that's 
more thorough review than the draft has had in the last three years ;-)

Some of your points are things we have considered before, but some are 
definitely new questions.  I don't propose to respond here, though, as 
there's a designated place for that (which I now notice there's no mention of 
in the document itself, not sure if that's another point in itself)

> I don't know Ian, and I'm not active in the working group for this
> draft, but if any of you are inclined, you have my permission to share
> the preceding with him

Consider it shared.

It's probably best, though, if you have any interest at all, to repost those 
comments on the MDX list so that it's reaching all the right people at once.  
Instructions for that list are in the README on the github page:

        https://github.com/iay/md-query

Note that this is not an IETF WG in any sense, it's just some people on a 
mailing list talking.  The intention is to publish either in the independent 
stream or in the proposed new REFEDS RFC stream if the details of that come 
together in time.

> (but obviously you should equally feel free to
> let the above nits just float downstream, particularly if we're not
> looking at using this spec as part of the InCommon MD distribution
> effort)

I think the idea is that if InCommon does move to per-entity metadata, this 
would be the obvious spec to base that on (once it is published, of course).

Thanks again for taking the time.

        -- Ian

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature