IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Why not just use ssh?

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 01 September 2010 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 485223A684C for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 14:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.629
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.629 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.347, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 YTc0QXm7DXwy for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 14:39:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bw0-f44.google.com (mail-bw0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10EBE3A690D for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 14:39:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so58217bwz.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.59.134 with SMTP id l6mr5403419bkh.176.1283377223165; Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:40:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.144.149 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 14:40:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik2ggyrTQG5hExX3f2K+Ly1R_A9yM6fZEUawsz-@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d48398080b610405d982ffd924f58e27.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com> <AANLkTin8CiHFoOSFdcRPern5YY-FdODC4GST+BrP3t_j@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=fn2JE7a0b_0KFFLwq3eG_-xnaRazXAMPGi0N3@mail.gmail.com> <CA566BAEAD6B3F4E8B5C5C4F61710C110FAFBCBD@TK5EX14MBXW605.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <AANLkTinE1MB10nUhpnU-SC+aLjPmFyu3NhjLC1-wMmW7@mail.gmail.com> <CA566BAEAD6B3F4E8B5C5C4F61710C110FAFBEF4@TK5EX14MBXW605.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <AANLkTim5Wsfohbn2S0jpm6CDkq+xFcpzDTRWJ0YXWbcg@mail.gmail.com> <20100901211959.GA10275@1wt.eu> <AANLkTik2ggyrTQG5hExX3f2K+Ly1R_A9yM6fZEUawsz-@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:40:23 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTinwSB3q-H=TL-yXKiAmeDbSCB9dBxuERzB6h39B@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
To: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636c5c06d7fe6dc048f398be1"
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] 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 21:39:56 -0000

On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:
> > Also, I don't see why TLS could not be used on top of HTTP as is proposed
> > by 2817. This has the advantage of HTTP being easy to handle with
> existing
> > infrastructure and offers the better protection of TLS.
>
> RFC 2817 is a joke and, as I understand things, about to be moved to
> historic.


I don't know about historic or not, but the Upgrade part of HTTP is
basically irrelevant
to the Web. Everyone uses 2818. The CONNECT part is still relevant.

-Ekr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email