MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191111195325.GE32847@kduck.mit.edu>
 <0df737cb-4947-4926-2c6d-dd3583356a2c@cs.tcd.ie>
 <D701674A-28EF-4B0B-8F57-6C6B4D83D37A@akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <D701674A-28EF-4B0B-8F57-6C6B4D83D37A@akamai.com>
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 14:42:56 -0800
Message-ID: <CAChr6Swr8PWN=HHrGfnZ+5_8rd2YyfC7SE2+9tBk2D8DNSQMeg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Kaduk, Ben" <bkaduk@akamai.com>
Cc: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, 
 "draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate.all@ietf.org"
 <draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate.all@ietf.org>, 
 "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000025b1f059719db58"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/nDhuDUzKZrD9OtpXtwqnl3TN1G8>
Subject: Re: [TLS] preliminary AD review of
 draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-05
Precedence: list

--000000000000025b1f059719db58
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 12:27 PM Kaduk, Ben <bkaduk@akamai.com> wrote:

> The one concrete one that I remember (and can't attribute to the HTMLized
> version dropping stuff) is RFC 7030 only in the header.
>
> I guess we can check what we want to do to DTLS as well, as RFC 6347 is
> listed as Updates:-ed but that's the DTLS 1.2 spec.  (6347 itself
> confusingly claims in the body text to "update DTLS 1.0 to work with TLS
> 1.2" but has an "Obsoletes: 4347" header.)  I don't see what specifically
> we update in 6347.
>

 I think the text in question is the last paragraph of RFC 6347's
Introduction:

"Implementations that speak both DTLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.0 can
   interoperate with those that speak only DTLS 1.0 (using DTLS 1.0 of
   course), just as TLS 1.2 implementations can interoperate with
   previous versions of TLS (see Appendix E.1 of [TLS12] for details),
   with the exception that there is no DTLS version of SSLv2 or SSLv3,
   so backward compatibility issues for those protocols do not apply."

This draft says "don't interoperate" in this situation.

thanks,
Rob

--000000000000025b1f059719db58
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 12:27 PM Kaduk, B=
en &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bkaduk@akamai.com">bkaduk@akamai.com</a>&gt; wrote=
:<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" sty=
le=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);paddi=
ng-left:1ex">The one concrete one that I remember (and can&#39;t attribute =
to the HTMLized version dropping stuff) is RFC 7030 only in the header.<br>
<br>
I guess we can check what we want to do to DTLS as well, as RFC 6347 is lis=
ted as Updates:-ed but that&#39;s the DTLS 1.2 spec.=C2=A0 (6347 itself con=
fusingly claims in the body text to &quot;update DTLS 1.0 to work with TLS =
1.2&quot; but has an &quot;Obsoletes: 4347&quot; header.)=C2=A0 I don&#39;t=
 see what specifically we update in 6347.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><d=
iv>=C2=A0I think the text in question is the last paragraph of RFC 6347&#39=
;s Introduction:</div><div><br></div><div>&quot;Implementations that speak =
both DTLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.0 can</div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0interoperate with those th=
at speak only DTLS 1.0 (using DTLS 1.0 of<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0course), just as =
TLS 1.2 implementations can interoperate with<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0previous vers=
ions of TLS (see Appendix E.1 of [TLS12] for details),<br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0with=
 the exception that there is no DTLS version of SSLv2 or SSLv3,<br>=C2=A0 =
=C2=A0so backward compatibility issues for those protocols do not apply.&qu=
ot;</div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">Th=
is draft says &quot;don&#39;t interoperate&quot; in this situation.</div><d=
iv class=3D"gmail_quote"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">thanks,</div>=
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">Rob</div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><br></div></=
div>

--000000000000025b1f059719db58--