Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis (Transport Layer

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 01 October 2009 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3DB628C143 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:27:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.756
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.756 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.157, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 qDAbykZlEXcS for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (stpeter.im [207.210.219.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFFC13A6A11 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-64-101-72-247.cisco.com (dhcp-64-101-72-247.cisco.com [64.101.72.247]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F45A4007B; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 10:28:51 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4AC4D8C3.4040306@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 10:28:51 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Macintosh/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey@cisco.com>
References: <90E934FC4BBC1946B3C27E673B4DB0E4A7E75F6BA5@LLE2K7-BE01.mitll.ad.local> <AC1CFD94F59A264488DC2BEC3E890DE508D3C853@xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <AC1CFD94F59A264488DC2BEC3E890DE508D3C853@xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
OpenPGP: url=http://www.saint-andre.com/me/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: simon@josefsson.org, tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis (Transport Layer
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:27:27 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/1/09 10:17 AM, Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) wrote:
> I don't think option 1 is an appropriate change for this document,
> although I could be convinced otherwise because I don't think the SHOULD
> is very enlightening.

I now agree that we need to say something about this in the TLS spec.

> For option 2 I would prefer text that explains the SHOULD, maybe
> something like:
> 
> "Since it is possible for a client to present a different server_name in
> the application protocol, application server implementations that rely
> upon these names being the same MUST check to make sure the client did
> not present a different name in the application protocol." 

+1

Peter

- --
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrE2MIACgkQNL8k5A2w/vw9KACgrEz9EQ5YK+5Hf3t0RK3o7LYu
dBoAn1Dp0RP8b8/cReUsS6xK/CGS5ee6
=3YP3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----