IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [TLS] WGLC: draft-ietf-tls-srp-13

Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com> Thu, 21 December 2006 18:01 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GxSEE-0002jF-RD; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:01:14 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GxSED-0002hG-Cw for tls@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:01:13 -0500
Received: from bay0-omc2-s20.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.156]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GxSEC-00053V-0v for tls@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:01:13 -0500
Received: from BAY103-W6 ([65.54.174.106]) by bay0-omc2-s20.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668); Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:01:11 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [69.227.152.254]
X-Originating-Email: [home_pw@msn.com]
Message-ID: <BAY103-W62D5794553D29F85F4F4892CE0@phx.gbl>
From: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
To: Peter Sylvester <peter.sylvester@edelweb.fr>
Subject: RE: [TLS] WGLC: draft-ietf-tls-srp-13
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:01:11 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Dec 2006 18:01:11.0295 (UTC) FILETIME=[FF72D0F0:01C72529]
X-Spam-Score: 2.6 (++)
X-Scan-Signature: 386e0819b1192672467565a524848168
Cc: tls@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: tls@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/tls>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1868151323=="
Errors-To: tls-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Experimental is simply a formal definition. You do anything you like. No need to register the 
(local) experimental values with IANA. By definition, an experiment is local to its community.One simply defines a ciphersuite in the local class (used by all instances and all vendors
in the self-defining experimental community). That value is properly contextualized by the TLS 
application, in engineer terms. yes, it may change later upon registration; but how hard is that 
to do, these days!?
I just reasoned the need to define my community a new naming type, in the TLS extensions for 
server name indication - mainly so I dont "abuse" host_name. I dont need to ask or register! Ideally, 
the std could  have reserved a "local" class of identified indication types; but, it didn't. Perhaps it 
will improve, later like TLS did for ciphersuites (improving upon SSL here!) assuming the politics 
is not attempting to restrict the name forms, the classes of indication, or limit applicability of the 
construct to IP bearers.



> Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:13:13 +0100> From: Peter.Sylvester@edelweb.fr> To: ekr@networkresonance.com> Subject: Re: [TLS] WGLC: draft-ietf-tls-srp-13> CC: tls@ietf.org> > Do ciphersuites in the experimental range mean that they could be> reused by any other experimental protocol, or does IANA reserve values?> >
_________________________________________________________________
Get into the holiday spirit, chat with Santa on Messenger.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/santabot/default.aspx?locale=en-us
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status