IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Last Call: RFC 2818 (HTTP Over TLS) to Proposed Standard

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Fri, 01 June 2012 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
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 4F48811E80A0 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 12:25:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.573
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.573 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.026, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 6VNtkECHO2MO for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 12:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB17411E812D for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 12:25:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [64.101.72.115] (unknown [64.101.72.115]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C82940075; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:41:55 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4FC9171E.2050503@stpeter.im>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 13:25:18 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
References: <20120601164205.25357.54620.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4FC90EBD.1050803@ieca.com> <38A40014-322F-4904-80E5-A48CF576DDB2@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <38A40014-322F-4904-80E5-A48CF576DDB2@vpnc.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Last Call: RFC 2818 (HTTP Over TLS) to Proposed Standard
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: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 19:25:21 -0000

On 6/1/12 1:16 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Jun 1, 2012, at 11:49 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
> 
>> So....I wasn't clear enough when I asked for this IETF LC.  I
>> initiated this process as an AD not at the request of the WG.
>> 
>> My rationale was that it's in the downref registry and that there's
>> 66 or so RFCs that refer to 2818 and a lot of them are normative.
>> If it ends up that folks prefer the 2818bis -> PS coupled with 2818
>> -> Historic.  I'd be all right with that too.
> 
> That seems the best way to go, given how much things have changed in
> the last decade.

Agreed. I don't see any harm in having lots of RFCs pointing to this
entry in the downref registry, and it seems better to update 2818 than
to have people thinking that 2818 is standards-track as it is today.

Peter

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

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status