IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Analysis of Interop scenarios TLS extension RI w/MCSV

<Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> Mon, 14 December 2009 08:31 UTC

Return-Path: <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9D483A69C1 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 00:31:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R9fJ+BMH7Wwz for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 00:31:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-mx06.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.122.233]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59DB63A6958 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 00:31:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh106.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.213]) by mgw-mx06.nokia.com (Switch-3.3.3/Switch-3.3.3) with ESMTP id nBE8VTXI023281; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:31:36 +0200
Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:31:34 +0200
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:31:35 +0200
Received: from NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.86]) by nok-am1mhub-02.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) with mapi; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:31:34 +0100
From: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com
To: mrex@sap.com
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 09:31:32 +0100
Thread-Topic: [TLS] Analysis of Interop scenarios TLS extension RI w/MCSV
Thread-Index: Acp5s7vyPZYGFLT9QFKRnhQ1bDU+iwC40hCA
Message-ID: <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB774F31E7F19F@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com>
References: <4B20ABA4.3050805@extendedsubset.com> from "Marsh Ray" at Dec 10, 9 02:04:52 am <200912101613.nBAGD3X2016314@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
In-Reply-To: <200912101613.nBAGD3X2016314@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Dec 2009 08:31:35.0261 (UTC) FILETIME=[D8CBA0D0:01CA7C97]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Analysis of Interop scenarios TLS extension RI w/MCSV
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/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: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:31:53 -0000

Martin Rex wrote:

> > That is interesting information. Would you happen to have a copy
> > of the last "official" spec you can send me?
> 
> Netscape's official SSLv3 spec as of 2005:
> http://web.archive.org/web/20050207004652/wp.netscape.com/eng/ssl3/3-SPEC.HTM

No, it's not. If you look at the "SSL 3.0 Specification page" 
back then:

http://web.archive.org/web/20050210100922/http://wp.netscape.com/eng/ssl3/

It says the "most recent draft SSL 3.0 specification" is 

http://web.archive.org/web/20050206122938/wp.netscape.com/eng/ssl3/draft302.txt

which includes the "must ignore extra data" text. The version your
link points to is called "previous draft of the SSL 3.0
specification".

However, I don't think it's very important or interesting what
Netscape considered "official" back then (and in any large company,
it's quite possible that multiple opinions exist...). Much more 
important is what the implementations still in active use do....

Best regards, 
Pasi 
(not wearing any hats)

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status