Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh?
Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> Wed, 01 September 2010 18:39 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@adambarth.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A413A67AB for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 11:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.129, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HuKWQTM9QKBm for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 11:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533EA3A6827 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 11:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws10 with SMTP id 10so7338328vws.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.168.10 with SMTP id s10mr5911024vcy.190.1283366413185; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iw0-f172.google.com (mail-iw0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b8sm3592787vci.21.2010.09.01.11.40.11 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:40:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iwn3 with SMTP id 3so7711872iwn.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.11.11 with SMTP id r11mr9143968ibr.135.1283366410598; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:40:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.187.218 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 11:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimCpofYNgFMeV403jhjdx3mh=MwBQ0Njg3wZA2s@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTik2dHmEdQBFssStJEXrNhqAJDSq0H2wL3_B-4Br@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=7zHivG5NjTxF6AZERoDyX+W+G0UvA-LQpmZA=@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinvbs+c8awROUC+7NAgUrTHhsXLQ8RxkuhFb=x6@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTik1-MiFd7LqkYpYgb=3wPBcfb5Qd_+sG45THKgX@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimCpofYNgFMeV403jhjdx3mh=MwBQ0Njg3wZA2s@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 11:39:40 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTiksMg7vvHk7HLVu1gLGnj=6QQt0Ead9Zj4WxsKs@mail.gmail.com>
To: ifette@google.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh?
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 18:39:45 -0000
2010/9/1 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) <ifette@google.com>: > Sure. But I would be surprised to see a browser that supports WebSockets but > not SNI, so it seemed a bit tangential. E.g. creating a new solution for WS > separate from SNI doesn't seem like it will make the solution any more > palatable / widely adopted than SNI. In fact, SNI is required by the current draft. Adam
- Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh? Adam Barth
- [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh? John Tamplin
- Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh? Brian Smith
- Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh? Eric Rescorla
- Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh? Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)
- Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh? Roberto Peon
- Re: [hybi] TLS-NPN - was Re: Why not just use ssh? Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ)