Re: [TLS] NextProtoNeg concerns

[Adam Langley <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Yoav Nir <[e-mail]> wrote:
> I would strongly prefer that it not say "opaque" but rather point to a registry of strings, similar to the TLS exporter label registry
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters/tls-parameters.xml#exporter-labels
>
> That does not have to mean that you need to publish an RFC for each label. The label space is huge, even if we limit in to case-insensitive latin letters plus numbers, slash, point, dash and colon, and up to 12 characters, it still dwarfs the US national debt expressed in Taiwanese cents (assuming there is such a thing as a Taiwanese cent). So a registry like that could be set up on a fcfs basis, with some reserved prefixes (priv-, exp-, com-companyname-) that could be used without registration. Or maybe require a priv- or exp- prefix for anything not specified at all, FCFS or expert review for other prefixes, and standards action for things that don't have a prefix (like "http/1.1", or "SSTP" if Microsoft chooses to document it)

I would be happy with a low-friction registry of names.


Cheers

AGL