Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus: TLS1.3->TLS*

Vlad Krasnov <> Fri, 18 November 2016 21:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64675129424 for <>; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:19:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TL7cGpMCKmiT for <>; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:19:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35ECF127078 for <>; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:19:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id d2so56275541pfd.0 for <>; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:19:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=MzOc3MXs6Fko83AfQCpYISj9hYWNhOuhSYecV1dXDi8=; b=r2aLrvMG6FH5I/d7Q7GUhzSC98R4vN3j7PNv2qzpg9oFUxz/xZdPbCaoj32bMr6BIJ KqwCInmAyz9fx6a4DVyQZ1ZAjNp7ZPJ9EIVIOzujQMo6uPJZNNvGGVAG54XjcZemwyoD KdZ9aK7ZjyUve8LkvT0PoS6Uh8yKGFQR2ZPZs=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=MzOc3MXs6Fko83AfQCpYISj9hYWNhOuhSYecV1dXDi8=; b=iO3P6Bz+d6QTv/cBFczVp0YMbPTt9G1jdCJ3TPQS02H4oKza1wl6gHOndIRHB6U1lI fychcVevmduWp1CMdZvWMWU374Jutn0BQuHK9UF4Qo0TRPxoyCHHp1cKZ4Y/Gje71ntJ 78h0ROM6dIX9ODccAsAe/UFtu4pOVRzy/UOaM5mC7IbORJW6WyfGuifoEhbYqJgDG44l 6ecJMfXyFH1H6SUN4ntFBvPNaZ0df7DZW9iTsUEyzHWe7SlEotOQjNofU3gYcx7jOhJ5 d8oTtPxS/xtdmh1yglvULkUW99FcS2zgPoI8OV8ZdiNAq8kPSUs5u/yXEgUZKE28pA/h y5Ww==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC03YzdDtqP4xR8G7Y6YUys4bFt6xAqA0p1Qg9bo4EHe0HeWE0w3yw2WtnCTMf7P7b7j0
X-Received: by with SMTP id t191mr3475885pgd.180.1479503946383; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:19:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id q9sm20052677pfg.47.2016. (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Vlad Krasnov <>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14A456)
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 13:19:04 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <>
To: "Salz, Rich" <>
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "D. J. Bernstein" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Confirming consensus: TLS1.3->TLS*
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." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 21:19:09 -0000

> Well, for example, your website has twice as many mentions of SSL as TLS.  Why?  Why don't you have a product called "Universal TLS"? The ratio is the same for TLS 1.0 had already existed for more then a decade before either place existed.  BTW, at google, it's 20:1, and that's just google, not the web.  (Counts were done in the obvious dumb way " tls" and then with "ssl" and noting the summary stats at the top of the return results.) 
> People are confused because we treat them as the same thing. 

Well, if the result of the confusion would be people *disabling* TLS 1.* in favor of SSL 3.0, they would discover very quickly what is TLS, and why no major browser works for them.