Re: [TLS] TLS 1.2 Long-term Support Profile vs HTTP/2.0

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Sun, 03 April 2016 11:44 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 2F87612D5DF for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Apr 2016 04:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 bh_MjiLYKsvI for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Apr 2016 04:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x230.google.com (mail-ig0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A0AF12D5DE for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Apr 2016 04:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-x230.google.com with SMTP id cl4so38467180igb.0 for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 03 Apr 2016 04:44:54 -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; bh=rvZB1vyKFZWM4x/rnVKk+BOEvYXw54s6RVnNgvOfxK0=; b=bmcJVfUH6KN57CURyBKPGBtImMz5ndr9V7He7S1VHOpaUYUvFsyOI/kDNnQ832LeNv okvQRSYxB9+us0/WtNM+FMeTFXw9/DeQPgl8Ip5Tbroja6dNL9PrB0zLoUb7ERsS9j/l bdQC4dFHbvki0pPYW1Y03t/rGNDwz3yWlGbiUzsCUPfUap4tP9KtMahaXaIlDBZ65RCK KANqtfan5xmDNpUZf11umXWy4r0hhudpx3Pv1DQx46S7OJb/2dqHDj3XDaZ1YfOX4R0o oMlYVWo2JIuMBz5C8qus1Xi2p/vwCbIzofKkq7gqiOWizzEIVpp3Mu3A6ZDGyfgRcw4m 5L6w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=rvZB1vyKFZWM4x/rnVKk+BOEvYXw54s6RVnNgvOfxK0=; b=a/eNC/Q5si/wOypmEJLuXeU1A2diwUyMyAe38Ire3mgnbgzx0zoPIGuLNYCT7up+N1 Sxh95JNCR1OZhLu5QTdBJGfY+aCmQq1ShmKvCUYrP+tuhl7fzJH5TsIHSdvkD4hlOfY7 zZ8BM6r0K+XhAvP173SJaZwbv4UUPre1+r8FLg2GICtkkdLZfHEyVfQOqwh8cL33Zs4f T5TDkDi+ywg3ddv12PN7uuCgQINw25sxkfugaRJZ3eKaCkXkf+lwqej8ceXg6tDm9yHL gm1sHux2HpE8sPIaEv+W7HC6GYlLz20yhPOAV3i0qiN0VW3alOnfT4KCw+MNO0Po+zXj Qmvw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJLd1oIBg76JxjUGo6jhPRwZsbsj9gfqIuB1UrO3s8aygnqQpIf6vLglV+tggV44VU0xSch9eAZaSl6T1g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.161.140 with SMTP id k134mr12539359ioe.190.1459683893779; Sun, 03 Apr 2016 04:44:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.36.43.5 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Apr 2016 04:44:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4C376E8@uxcn10-tdc05.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
References: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4C2374E@uxcn10-tdc05.UoA.auckland.ac.nz> <1459497291.3034.20.camel@redhat.com> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4C376E8@uxcn10-tdc05.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2016 21:44:53 +1000
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUcOFaAdXc=mBnWg9=RFgQzVFjEdspgq_Bd30ei0f7sYQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/WB-KZVJ_B30IevAIoLxrW7ewz3k>
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.2 Long-term Support Profile vs HTTP/2.0
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 03 Apr 2016 11:44:56 -0000

On 3 April 2016 at 18:18, Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>; wrote:
> I think the reason why there's no rationale is because there's no rational
> explanation for lumping TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA256 in with the likes
> of TLS_RSA_EXPORT_WITH_RC4_40_MD5.

You evidently believe that a decision to move to AEAD only is
irrational.  Others, myself included, do not.