Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 27 March 2015 18:02 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 96DEF1A8968 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.012
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.012 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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 ckudd1QEIxGD for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:02:17 -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 0FE781B2A8A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 11:01:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YbYW1-0004N2-5O for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 17:57:53 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 17:57:53 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YbYW1-0004N2-5O@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1YbYVt-0004LG-BH for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 17:57:45 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1YbYVs-0000YQ-B4 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 17:57:45 +0000
Received: by obbld8 with SMTP id ld8so25144206obb.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=4MY17FCievsKI/XxHwfMKKM50RN11dCmYVn/AJqoB0M=; b=tY6BWlnPIIl9GsK3BFhRyznSk20Ane1LWQVHOmA/iThH7CUQGjoQPEiD42mCEeWupV 50RyXcYeMU6OfGXn6SYA9m6Zb9cAuYGloI7VKSgsrKuMjzjpsSyX5YxMTza8/JMXyuEI 8gjTqSld4gpiISWamnYF57A/6NaxBsdv4qi2NSqgEAHu8Lojeo5irHgCtcx83b6AF7do heHOHq6LQy/zmj6R6AJdWb9gVALpVY/hQ29Kvd1C4QVsBsGFzwKgwRGIqoDgdrsDt+gn tApunXQTA2kUWRBNQnR5tQCJWPGyz8vTTSJleK2ynH1e82IHDpqNEET2yOqtoF362LI8 tS0g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.229.201 with SMTP id c192mr8512479oih.44.1427479038562; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.202.48.151 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <emfb77a216-c881-4ccc-b0ac-177521265d55@bodybag>
References: <F30E70B3-14F0-47F7-8228-98527034A5CC@mnot.net> <emfb77a216-c881-4ccc-b0ac-177521265d55@bodybag>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 12:57:18 -0500
Message-ID: <CABkgnnU-XdPR_1bXsyhSTuLu8xHdqUiC4z6mcm064sLfkoBcjg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.174; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f174.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.897, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1YbYVs-0000YQ-B4 3891ce6902d9d86a136e20b3e18232e1
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnU-XdPR_1bXsyhSTuLu8xHdqUiC4z6mcm064sLfkoBcjg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/29038
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 26 March 2015 at 20:17, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:
> Tunnel-TLS-ALPN to be used if the next layer is TLS
> Tunnel-ALPN if it's not TLS

As I mention up-thread, the presence of TLS is part of the protocol.
If the protocol negotiates TLS in-band, then it can be one protocol
identifier (STARTTLS or absence thereof is purely a function of the
protocol in use).

h2 and h2c are different protocols because the presence or absence of
TLS is fundamental.  I'd expect two tokens for any protocol that isn't
intrinsically able to decide about the status of TLS.