IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Next Protocol Negotiation 03

Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com> Tue, 22 May 2012 01:31 UTC

Return-Path: <marsh@extendedsubset.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 1A97921F8575 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:31:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 PeeCazJqMzYp for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F4E621F8569 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xs01.extendedsubset.com ([69.164.193.58]) by mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <marsh@extendedsubset.com>) id 1SWdwZ-000Avp-Hw; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:31:23 +0000
Received: from [172.16.2.4] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xs01.extendedsubset.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 588A16085; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:31:22 +0000 (UTC)
X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS
X-Originating-IP: 69.164.193.58
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX195Y7KgnF6Tef5hcRZJlMi3J38zE/UHLb0=
Message-ID: <4FBAEC63.9030808@extendedsubset.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 20:31:15 -0500
From: Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Wan-Teh Chang <wtc@google.com>
References: <4F9981FC.4000205@extendedsubset.com> <201204261721.q3QHL0lA014062@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp> <CAL9PXLwkMqyaSfDLssGH_oT5gHFeV2s64v-gTiYFH+dSq9ZvAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAL9PXLyX0NKtjK4DcmSq-J3X3yNhNm2BUC3HPLbpEALzR0NmYg@mail.gmail.com> <4FBAC851.8090305@extendedsubset.com> <CALTJjxH-w1Xc_-oFLLX_SYYwTxJxpVu=J6+oJDUCG5SxJ70WFA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALTJjxH-w1Xc_-oFLLX_SYYwTxJxpVu=J6+oJDUCG5SxJ70WFA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Adam Langley <agl@chromium.org>, tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Next Protocol Negotiation 03
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, 22 May 2012 01:31:25 -0000

On 05/21/2012 07:12 PM, Wan-Teh Chang wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Marsh Ray<marsh@extendedsubset.com>  wrote:
>
>> Now we can drop the parenthesis in "NP(N)"!
>
> Could you explain the different between "NPN" and "NP(N)"?  Thanks.

It's a trivial thing but the extension is Next Protocol Negotiation and 
the former handshake message was Next Protocol. The proposal had also 
switched between those names at one point.

>> If it's intended to be usable by more than just NPN, perhaps it should be
>> described in a separate document?
>
> I agree.

It's a shame that RFC 4680 'TLS Handshake Message for Supplemental Data' 
couldn't be used for this, it even has a 2 byte 'type' enum which could 
perhaps map easily to extension types. But its RFC is quite specific 
about its position in the handshake. Perhaps something of it can be 
built upon.

- Marsh

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email