IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: SNI requirement for H2

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Fri, 03 April 2015 19:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@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 9335C1A011B for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:29:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 GE7jmeUeab_E for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:29:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6097E1A009C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 12:29:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Ye7E9-00013U-O4 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2015 19:26:01 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 19:26:01 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Ye7E9-00013U-O4@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1Ye7E6-00012n-HE for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2015 19:25:58 +0000
Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60] helo=1wt.eu) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1Ye7E5-0001IJ-Iu for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 03 Apr 2015 19:25:58 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id t33JPWFd022152; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 21:25:32 +0200
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 21:25:31 +0200
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
Cc: Nicholas Hurley <hurley@mozilla.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20150403192531.GP15429@1wt.eu>
References: <CAGxKgz2-5OSwPGs=S_EVwPv-dYvPSO-H4YCiXX5wt-CxTxMVpg@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcGAJjRXpQPKOs9rLk-5=JYjj24=DxNHCAv+Mib5v+2GA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAP+FsNcGAJjRXpQPKOs9rLk-5=JYjj24=DxNHCAv+Mib5v+2GA@mail.gmail.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=-4.0
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.019, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Ye7E5-0001IJ-Iu 73aac09223f16f8a0bc956280a87cac0
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: SNI requirement for H2
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20150403192531.GP15429@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/29239
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 Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 12:06:36PM -0700, Roberto Peon wrote:
> Does anyone recall why 6066 has no SNI for IP literals? (It could be an
> empty SNI field or the SNI could indicate the IP literal)?

I find it surprizing as well, given that NAT/reverse proxy is very common
in front of servers and that the address specified in the URL bar (hence in
the SNI if it were sent) would be authoritative and would not necessarily
match the one the server sees on the local socket.

Willy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email