Re: [TLS] SNI and ALPN -- which first?

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Wed, 30 July 2014 14:09 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
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 EFCEF1A0060 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 07:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 FNCOqCgdrehO for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 07:09:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com [96.6.114.112]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6A41A005D for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 07:09:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC62048492; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:09:41 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com [172.27.22.71]) by prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE2F4848E; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:09:41 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from usma1ex-cashub.kendall.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cashub4.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.27.105.20]) by prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA44B98052; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 14:09:41 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.107.26]) by USMA1EX-CASHUB4.kendall.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.105.20]) with mapi; Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:09:41 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: "mrex@sap.com" <mrex@sap.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:09:40 -0400
Thread-Topic: [TLS] SNI and ALPN -- which first?
Thread-Index: Ac+rtlAll1NtWrOLRLejs0AOnE6zLQASX03A
Message-ID: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C718599EDF28@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C718599EDDDB@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <20140730052243.AF5081ADCB@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
In-Reply-To: <20140730052243.AF5081ADCB@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/EeKtQHhkWQRDtcAwGkUff32GloA
Cc: "TLS@ietf.org \(tls@ietf.org\)" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] SNI and ALPN -- which first?
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, 30 Jul 2014 14:09:44 -0000

> Technically, interference of protocol options could arise already

Yes.  I'm trying to find out if that's a general problem we should address.

	/r$

--  
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technologies, Cambridge MA
IM: rsalz@jabber.me Twitter: RichSalz