Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus: TLS1.3->TLS*

I already hummed in the room, but I think it should stay as TLS 1.3. Either
of TLS 2 or TLS 4 makes the SSL/TLS silliness worse. One matches SSL 2.0
and the other just makes all this weirder. (Do we really want 2.0 < 3.0 <
1.0 < 1.1 < 1.2 < 4?)

TLS 1.3 is the natural next number and doesn't make anything worse. Let's
just use it.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 3:04 PM Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:12:48AM +0900, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> > At IETF 97, the chairs lead a discussion to resolve whether the WG should
> > rebrand TLS1.3 to something else.  Slides can be found @
> >
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-tls-rebranding-aka-pr612-01.pdf
> .
> >
> > The consensus in the room was to leave it as is, i.e., TLS1.3, and to not
> > rebrand it to TLS 2.0, TLS 2, or TLS 4.  We need to confirm this decision
> > on the list so please let the list know your top choice between:
> >
> > - Leave it TLS 1.3
> > - Rebrand TLS 2.0
> > - Rebrand TLS 2
> > - Rebrand TLS 4
>
> TLS 4 sounds about right to me:
>
>     * Conveys the substantial protocol changes
>     * Avoids any confusion from SSLv2/SSLv3 bearing higher numbers than
> TLS 1.x
>     * If someone happens to call it SSLv4 it will not be confusing.
>     * Matches the minor version on the wire protocol
>
> Though with this choice, the next version would likely be TLS 5,
> whether or not it is a major change or just incremental change, I
> don't think it will going forward be important to convey that some
> version updates are minor.  A non-branching integral sequence feels
> about right.
>
> The only downside I see is that it becomes unclear what to call
> some future protocol version with a wire protocol major number not
> equal to 3.  My take is that such a protocol would no longer be
> TLS (it would presumably have an incompatible HELLO and/or record
> layer format and would not be able to negotiate older protocol
> versions), so there's likely not much point in calling such a
> hypothetical beast "TLS".
>
> --
>         Viktor.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>