Re: [TLS] invariant or not: one TLS connection per TCP connection?

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 08 July 2020 12:46 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 9C4B43A09A9 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:46:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 Ve5HXniZ96y5 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x134.google.com (mail-lf1-x134.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::134]) (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 52CD53A09C0 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:46:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x134.google.com with SMTP id m26so26799506lfo.13 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 05:46:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=eoTFVriAqEkQJhR5oNwH4oshzdJlUtiwUporw3I4QdA=; b=kJ+KrvSvxXxXdoxOEWPskp5dWKRGdiIdU/ZwyFLm/DWoYKntZ4l+8pc31ur5Eg7xeP 5kP2AY2odLMgEPXrp0tHk3GM5wn2g5gLLShv9+eXUfrW03idA7qjFgkUV759q45uIbDm r/nfi96HeKbIW1Q6+myiA8bIh/5rkJTHUb/TBTEMuYn1xeiBusDJ63Ycus7MWUMDmxRm v89IecwyR6KEq7S1nA6ub05COOkqpYwOGJCarkekOtdnJTowGNiuyXD9jhEtvmjPL69u b1y9l/iXjmoTjugdFaNpphRsK+6qiZgCTRl8sH2zZaS0rZB6VrOlEzKZagoRq0G2Q5pj Catg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eoTFVriAqEkQJhR5oNwH4oshzdJlUtiwUporw3I4QdA=; b=lagrKRt7r9OxYGlQbNaeYG1aqXI+p8LYssm4pzUcidIRWx3DVNOGc76fpKvovmWD3L q0HDXaSyUsUxNy+9bycwU14Tg9Gu1DKEiZ0xbT8Xs9wKJ+5XbxM1EBefUN6/2ikmklRM 4nzuv6XRNYRfjxAIJYt2zZ0USsn1fTVxKdmPs4YxRb4mmTRZezjq9reRoOL5Wbm67ond +KTM3D94bm7RGPxDZLl3NotFQKCY5VkPB6d42b//K11qGC8CfAfEHpLRCIZVqQ+W9GR+ 7C59Vk4Ttf5Mtu5dw9LsyQiRP/bThaDO5WnHJtYahCNz13q+t5zLGLnB/EV9/VFzY9Pl ap8A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531KbnLLzniyavSTtgjRsJp6qlgOBBUliGw3irEH6rulo5+9j/0p 4DzNhri2n+hI0dwJ7sTHAwRMOEAELAtDIclYEslBliJz2Cc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyl1IIUUHfQOYA34HI+7A4ffLmep14/e6NFlBnHtXvf0KlPro35qMhbyAwm7eGiEwcL40YO2upfffXaVW829Fk=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4158:: with SMTP id c24mr36404427lfi.109.1594212359421; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 05:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200708042223.GB20623@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200708042223.GB20623@akamai.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 05:45:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPv=3GUvs64C7RjqykpqeTQcos4d-E20D2usT84s6eXjA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <bkaduk=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000061513c05a9ed7ddb"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/X0pRCW44Kbj5nM8KYBo4rxS3-Wg>
Subject: Re: [TLS] invariant or not: one TLS connection per TCP connection?
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 12:46:06 -0000

On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 3:59 AM Benjamin Kaduk <bkaduk=
40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> There's an interesting note in draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-tls-08 (currently
> in IESG Evaluation):
>
>    The protocol convention specified in the current document assumes
>    there can be no more than one concurrent TLS session per TCP
>    connection.  This is true of current generations of TLS, but might be
>    different in a future version of TLS.
>
> Can we envision wanting to do such a thing (e.g., with connection IDs for
> non-D TLS)?  If not, I can give them guidance that this type of statement
> is not needed.
>

This may turn out to be permissible with cTLS, so I think we should not
remove it.

-Ekr


> Thanks,
>
> Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>