Re: 9.2.2 Cipher fallback and FF<->Jetty interop problem

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Fri, 19 September 2014 06:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C31C1A884E for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 23:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.554
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oEppRHVcI35p for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 23:00:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF68D1A7002 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Sep 2014 23:00:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1XUrBe-0000qF-Pu for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 05:56:54 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 05:56:54 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XUrBe-0000qF-Pu@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1XUrB6-0000pL-5t for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 05:56:20 +0000
Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1XUrB5-0003y5-1n for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 05:56:20 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by mail.home.local (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id s8J5tmCv014030; Fri, 19 Sep 2014 07:55:48 +0200
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 07:55:48 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: Simone Bordet <simone.bordet@gmail.com>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20140919055548.GA13993@1wt.eu>
References: <20140917073241.GA7665@LK-Perkele-VII> <CAFewVt4pxE+9NpzYuzMKGmEdrDXzk50mC99ZbrM6M-uEoKXrHA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NGYcDvPcxDvaTRBP3p4Pnb7gw39WUDY3bNVnOGQjBgciQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFewVt7+UAJYfKAR6DRZi_mqdzSaYw6L-pT1qg=UyOaP1ojhTw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NEhAEaPiUgi_vX6Oimw+Y-k3WrnL0gJZKPxQ8KZVuFVfw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnU6C+TzJzdeQZhwXucuPUrPh1yyp1cpRd9jSePMjAnONQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NEHZbWLof=ZWEa2UdjBw1Bf+kQCHzPkrhcSU80WaDibeA@mail.gmail.com> <C76D7E6B-06BA-4FF1-B0AF-804AC118A38E@gbiv.com> <CAFWmRJ1ZEwKP9HaWJODjU6CZ8mbw9sticm7LJ8bL_iLy7qc6Bw@mail.gmail.com> <B9D3F14A-C300-4AB7-B140-41E86CFCB24F@gbiv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <B9D3F14A-C300-4AB7-B140-41E86CFCB24F@gbiv.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.212.114.60; envelope-from=w@1wt.eu; helo=1wt.eu
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.733, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1XUrB5-0003y5-1n 831730c26039dbf312c239f283b9ab7d
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 9.2.2 Cipher fallback and FF<->Jetty interop problem
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20140919055548.GA13993@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/27131
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:56:41AM -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Sep 18, 2014, at 9:33 AM, Simone Bordet wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
> >> I still don't believe that any of these requirements belong in h2,
> >> and I won't implement them even if they end up in the RFC.
> > 
> > As much as I would like to have 9.2.2 reworded to delegate to the TLS
> > spec, not implementing it on servers while all major browsers
> > implements it will result in a closed connection, no fallback and an
> > empty white page.
> 
> No, it will just be left to the administrator to configure the right ciphers.
> Doing that inside an application protocol is insane.

Totally agreed, and for haproxy it will certainly be the same, on both sides!

Willy