Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 -> TLS 2.0?

Rob Stradling <rob.stradling@comodo.com> Tue, 30 August 2016 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <rob.stradling@comodo.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 C9B5512D734 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:04:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.694
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.694 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=1.506] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 cSlnoocFc1wb for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:04:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mmextmx2.mcr.colo.comodoca.net (mmextmx2.mcr.colo.comodoca.net [IPv6:2a02:1788:402:c00::c0a8:9cd6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2D5F12D815 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 18188 invoked by uid 1004); 30 Aug 2016 21:04:20 -0000
Received: from ian.brad.office.comodo.net (HELO ian.brad.office.comodo.net) (192.168.0.202) by mmextmx2.mcr.colo.comodoca.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 22:04:20 +0100
Received: (qmail 3288 invoked by uid 1000); 30 Aug 2016 21:04:20 -0000
Received: from and0004.comodo.net (HELO [192.168.0.58]) (192.168.0.58) (smtp-auth username rob, mechanism plain) by ian.brad.office.comodo.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPSA; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 22:04:20 +0100
To: tls@ietf.org
References: <201608301419.33620.davemgarrett@gmail.com> <2135572.Ea2pKTvtKx@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com>
From: Rob Stradling <rob.stradling@comodo.com>
Message-ID: <e531b567-cb92-769d-bf77-5f2ef98714ab@comodo.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 22:04:20 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2135572.Ea2pKTvtKx@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/bg3nQDCyB48y7F-oL-DPP-_sl4Y>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 -> TLS 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: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 21:04:27 -0000

On 30/08/16 21:14, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Tuesday, 30 August 2016 14:19:33 CEST Dave Garrett wrote:
>> * Keep the version ID as { 3, 4 } (already weird counting; changing risks
>> more intolerance)
>
> IMNSHO this alone is enough of a reason not to do this
>
> it's enough explaining to people that SSLv3.3 is really TLSv1.2, now we'll
> have SSLv3.4 == TLSv1.3 == TLSv2.0
>
> it's silly at this point

It's been silly for nearly two decades already!

https://plus.google.com/+IlyaGrigorik/posts/BesDRVDqB4h

So...

On 30/08/16 21:20, Erik Nygren wrote:
<snip>
>> However, I think we should consider calling it TLS 4 or TLS 4.0 or TLS 5.
>>
>> In particular, much of the non-technical audience still calls it "SSL"
>> (pet peeve of many of us, I suspect) and having a version number clearly
>> greater than SSLv3 and not confusing with SSLv2 would be quite
>> valuable.  "TLS 2" may have risk for unfortunate confusions with SSLv2
>> and SSLv3.

How about we drop the "TLS" name completely, and simply call it "SSLv4" 
or "SSLv5" ?  Then the non-technical audience that still calls it "SSL" 
would magically become correct again.  :-)

Returning to a previous name seems to be trendy at the moment...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS

-- 
Rob Stradling
Senior Research & Development Scientist
COMODO - Creating Trust Online