IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-tls-applayerprotoneg-01

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Tue, 20 August 2013 20:14 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12AFF11E8153 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.607
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.607 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.007, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OxE6lgN2SW+U for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x22a.google.com (mail-we0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E88B11E8142 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f170.google.com with SMTP id w62so867300wes.1 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FmHZVlMSjuziBlVnuc6RXQ5XM47ZWpdTnwnCjEvDmZM=; b=J0VD9qXQJgpsHo/lf+fiIgEEKwG/ofA4VdTVJmDqn0zbIVs19uN3E5hTtXDuvA3d9i SywiMAeBTfNxhI2elLTFvxEwVQ1JN4RHzqmd36WWEd5C8VX3fgUVwC/zCM7FPUuXKPvm aGAraqVFoRuFZ4P5ETJB8NSMM2xtMmc8BIUmO6gaNfUDOt56b7HmA7S3qftU/taDjXpz k84Cl3wy+CcJZiLJcgn5IhOjUr+4B79SQwOAQhFHwThOi7yOQlzcFXUoYhZne7D7aH+3 NzGX3J04vo4NViKjlCngTr/1+G2tk7MmHkbM/KtpLyH519YgHDbOvnHE3nM+H9fSwsUY KZhQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.220.103 with SMTP id pv7mr2869104wjc.14.1377029663200; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.28.39 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <073b3285216c4e7b8879cd9cefc4c423@BL2PR03MB194.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CABkgnnXUwLQnVNt19Advb3s7ZGoc_Mrmr7AodigxZKyEZmPYwg@mail.gmail.com> <3651ef9088a147dd8e8d887f769a9538@BL2PR03MB194.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <48F1B141-16C5-448E-887F-6D91E7535A2D@checkpoint.com> <CABkgnnXC9r8Son7TgAtp=oOBb9Je7_=9Fwnfv=v_VgeSRhyeDA@mail.gmail.com> <42699D1B-62E4-4E90-BF35-2C56A7520403@checkpoint.com> <073b3285216c4e7b8879cd9cefc4c423@BL2PR03MB194.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 13:14:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnX8Fdjhr3yshunhCX8pDpbGyzs=N-T932gC7AXrKMa-Sw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-tls-applayerprotoneg-01
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 20:14:26 -0000

On 20 August 2013 12:16, Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com> wrote:
> The convenience of harmonizing the HTTP/1.1 protocol ID is clear to me. Unfortunately, the current lower-case ID is already used, e.g. by MS clients and Google servers. We could add an alternative, upper-case version of the ID in the draft, but in practice the lower-case version will remain deployed/supported for years to come. I doubt that the benefits of "harmonization" would outweigh the resulting confusion and the extra bytes in the ClientHello, so perhaps it's better to keep the existing lower-case HTTP/1.1 protocol ID.

Sounds like a good enough reason to keep the http/1.1 registration
lowercase.  Doubling up is almost guaranteed to cause more confusion
than a mere case shift.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email