IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-downgrade-scsv-00

Bodo Moeller <bmoeller@acm.org> Wed, 15 October 2014 19:27 UTC

Return-Path: <SRS0=qaHA=7G=acm.org=bmoeller@srs.kundenserver.de>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 667271A885A for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:27:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.638
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.638 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 m2W8U_OfEG_S for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:27:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 014D21A1B1A for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:27:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yk0-f169.google.com (mail-yk0-f169.google.com [209.85.160.169]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreue001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MZ5db-1XiaqT406V-00ViXU; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 21:27:35 +0200
Received: by mail-yk0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 10so875328ykt.0 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.110.35 with SMTP id t23mr16979343yhg.126.1413401253724; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.194.15 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.194.15 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <543EBC5D.5010805@polarssl.org>
References: <2112FCAD-4820-49D9-9871-6501C83A554D@cisco.com> <543E95AE.1030300@redhat.com> <CADMpkcLDgsR9D5xk75iXjZJLMyZPtGEEGF70fadBb4_aEKOPsw@mail.gmail.com> <543EBC5D.5010805@polarssl.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 21:27:33 +0200
Message-ID: <CADMpkcLK8FODyFo4SrVyeP5ZTvL-7gKOeeX-w5AVC_bWWtA9JA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bodo Moeller <bmoeller@acm.org>
To: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <mpg@polarssl.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1133358aa7528705057b1fc4"
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:2wBHQ34oQukOcZW8JEpGF7eRwe2kA+bIxTEOXDpRTkx oRIVTCxFfO8ViBDLbX4SB8RPEYRyfuAJO302HGa/iw0w1Eq7CU rc82eCwkmYQukebTffzOJ/va2V7QzEqCJyJ+Z47c8m6+8kFQrU +VkfsLS1Quc4ji8VfmGy84Jl5u5oJmLRBgFbNQnB8xBOaoqMhU LKfNP580WiP42dBiKfMdM7Bu1nv8/5441TOWwn/1kScyRqN+ql nXvmvcSRPzz++Aewd6Usz7NHQKhdPx3wHxWuQIFFyfIfIi7uBY /NxXwu+PEELjqIg/YvspML3hq6gxNGK5i91CxvzNF55NxY0F/P VLY4HDUiiFXBWP5P77umXLcvAgLKNlYgXlmLXx2cCFNQ371kA7 0k5VHhX3on1YtJ2UJfIO8HgoT5qBcByn/5kMGRJEt37zi7TfmZ NC33I
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/7MtxvsIA4taIPBDDm2VHydfm8Mk
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-downgrade-scsv-00
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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/options/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: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 19:27:38 -0000

Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard" <mpg@polarssl.org>:

> Maybe the draft could mention that after aborting the downgraded
connection due
> to this fatal alert, clients may want to retry with the original version?

Hm -- probably probably not in this form as the specification doesn't say
that or how you should retry, but we could point out that network glitches
could result in seeing the alert on a fallback retry (so that implementors
can take this into account for whatever it is that they need to achieve).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email