IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Analysis of Interop scenarios TLS extension RI w/MCSV

David-Sarah Hopwood <david-sarah@jacaranda.org> Fri, 11 December 2009 18:11 UTC

Return-Path: <djhopwood@googlemail.com>
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 3F6B63A68E9 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:11:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 X+fQwQqlFd9C for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:11:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.26]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE7873A67FE for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:11:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 9so345763eyd.51 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:11:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=7lLgJr9Hq+J69qmWvCXxoOU4S4hIIUHWaMJLeNK6+hU=; b=VOVQC4bLdFGpgVBTzmr69Brzt4h9oNH6bO1S8LAwN6m5KPpi1hPWe7H1pRhm6QTs53 1JEIn5EmKHXJpwseX1PQ7Ps40IRSQPzXYL34LHfpXLRD9sR8zsBR6jpkmsh2FipIk+Tn vgRzr391JDzqLV/EtpBsaw6MOJYA/J6lETjOU=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=MNIIbdOv2P0uckpCRV9FcpzYTyBW03A9INTr0YgArIaFjGYFbc/jjENf4p5ExoXuqA 2Ei+FlsZTD29Rd7hkDW2Gca/7aMtYjn3PRiChEWziAJua8RV4jhshXmjPnhVHluc4T0V 8qPo0+9jPYqmmdpitLZY62DVRtpqCFigPpI7Y=
Received: by 10.213.50.69 with SMTP id y5mr1865376ebf.48.1260555086111; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:11:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?192.168.0.2? (5e05ad48.bb.sky.com [94.5.173.72]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 15sm1307353ewy.8.2009.12.11.10.11.24 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 11 Dec 2009 10:11:25 -0800 (PST)
Sender: David-Sarah Hopwood <djhopwood@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <4B228B4B.8020709@jacaranda.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:11:23 +0000
From: David-Sarah Hopwood <david-sarah@jacaranda.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070326 Thunderbird/2.0.0.0 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tls@ietf.org
References: <200912111458.nBBEwPFR008154@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
In-Reply-To: <200912111458.nBBEwPFR008154@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig9D22D79B99EF6740E49FE849"
Subject: Re: [TLS] Analysis of Interop scenarios TLS extension RI w/MCSV
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: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:11:43 -0000

Martin Rex wrote:
> Nelson B Bolyard wrote:
>>> Keeping an old version of a specification around in a MUCH
>>> MORE promentiently fashion for 9 years tells a lot about what
>>> Netscape thought of the draft-302.txt document.
>> It's not "much more prominent".  It's merely HTML.  Prettier, perhaps.
> 
> Let's see:
> 
> The following URL says "SPEC":
> http://web.archive.org/web/20050207004652/wp.netscape.com/eng/ssl3/3-SPEC.HTM
> 
> This URL says "Draft":
> http://web.archive.org/web/20050206122938/wp.netscape.com/eng/ssl3/draft302.txt
> 
> and includes an _explicit_ expiration of May 1997.

This is really reaching. They are both *draft* *specifications*.

Yes, the former should have been removed from the site, or marked as
obsolete. That's water under the bridge now.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥  http://davidsarah.livejournal.com

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status