IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-tls-applayerprotoneg-01

Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com> Tue, 20 August 2013 21:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir@checkpoint.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 8B7AA11E82D8 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:36:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.724
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.724 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.125, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 BOXFWfrGg-yg for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:36:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.checkpoint.com (smtp.checkpoint.com [194.29.34.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19F1611E82E6 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DAG-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([194.29.34.150]) by smtp.checkpoint.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7KLaAX5004440; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 00:36:10 +0300
X-CheckPoint: {5213E14A-38-1B221DC2-1FFFF}
Received: from IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([169.254.2.105]) by DAG-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com ([169.254.3.223]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 00:36:10 +0300
From: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-tls-applayerprotoneg-01
Thread-Index: AQHOnQaCdJJT7vp320qHp0flMWqEHJmc+GSAgABs+YCAALn/gIAAFyoAgAAQpICAABA3gIAAFuUA
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 21:36:09 +0000
Message-ID: <383DCBA8-194B-461B-BB8D-45CC501DEDD8@checkpoint.com>
References: <CABkgnnXUwLQnVNt19Advb3s7ZGoc_Mrmr7AodigxZKyEZmPYwg@mail.gmail.com> <3651ef9088a147dd8e8d887f769a9538@BL2PR03MB194.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <48F1B141-16C5-448E-887F-6D91E7535A2D@checkpoint.com> <CABkgnnXC9r8Son7TgAtp=oOBb9Je7_=9Fwnfv=v_VgeSRhyeDA@mail.gmail.com> <42699D1B-62E4-4E90-BF35-2C56A7520403@checkpoint.com> <073b3285216c4e7b8879cd9cefc4c423@BL2PR03MB194.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CABkgnnX8Fdjhr3yshunhCX8pDpbGyzs=N-T932gC7AXrKMa-Sw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnX8Fdjhr3yshunhCX8pDpbGyzs=N-T932gC7AXrKMa-Sw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.31.21.0]
x-kse-antivirus-interceptor-info: scan successful
x-kse-antivirus-info: Clean
x-cpdlp: 1169b72e900bf0b470757412593cf29d7729847d43
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <02F3CF22254EEA4691093400602C3628@ad.checkpoint.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-tls-applayerprotoneg-01
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, 20 Aug 2013 21:36:27 -0000

On Aug 20, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 20 August 2013 12:16, Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> The convenience of harmonizing the HTTP/1.1 protocol ID is clear to me. Unfortunately, the current lower-case ID is already used, e.g. by MS clients and Google servers. We could add an alternative, upper-case version of the ID in the draft, but in practice the lower-case version will remain deployed/supported for years to come. I doubt that the benefits of "harmonization" would outweigh the resulting confusion and the extra bytes in the ClientHello, so perhaps it's better to keep the existing lower-case HTTP/1.1 protocol ID.
> 
> Sounds like a good enough reason to keep the http/1.1 registration
> lowercase.  Doubling up is almost guaranteed to cause more confusion
> than a mere case shift.

+1

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email