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: From: Peter Williams To: Peter Sylvester 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." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1868151323==" Errors-To: tls-bounces@lists.ietf.org --===============1868151323== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_b4816b50-297c-4e64-b33c-326a1e272659_" --_b4816b50-297c-4e64-b33c-326a1e272659_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Experimental is simply a formal definition. You do anything you like. No ne= ed to register the=20 (local) experimental values with IANA. By definition, an experiment is loca= l to its community.One simply defines a ciphersuite in the local class (use= d by all instances and all vendors in the self-defining experimental community). That value is properly contex= tualized by the TLS=20 application, in engineer terms. yes, it may change later upon registration;= but how hard is that=20 to do, these days!? I just reasoned the need to define my community a new naming type, in the T= LS extensions for=20 server name indication - mainly so I dont "abuse" host_name. I dont need to= ask or register! Ideally,=20 the std could have reserved a "local" class of identified indication types= ; but, it didn't. Perhaps it=20 will improve, later like TLS did for ciphersuites (improving upon SSL here!= ) assuming the politics=20 is not attempting to restrict the name forms, the classes of indication, or= limit applicability of the=20 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-1= 3> CC: tls@ietf.org> > Do ciphersuites in the experimental range mean that = they could be> reused by any other experimental protocol, or does IANA rese= rve values?> > _________________________________________________________________ Get into the holiday spirit, chat with Santa on Messenger. http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/santabot/default.aspx?locale=3Den-= us= --_b4816b50-297c-4e64-b33c-326a1e272659_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 loca= l to its community.

One simply defines a ciphersuite in the local cl= ass (used by all instances and all vendors
in the self-defining experimental community). That value is properly c= ontextualized 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 T= LS 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 indica= tion 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@ed= elweb.fr
> To: ekr@networkresonance.com
> Subject: Re: [TLS] WG= LC: draft-ietf-tls-srp-13
> CC: tls@ietf.org
>
> Do ciph= ersuites in the experimental range mean that they could be
> reused b= y any other experimental protocol, or does IANA reserve values?
> >

Get into the holiday spirit, chat with Santa on Messen= ger.=A0 Ho-Ho-Ho! = --_b4816b50-297c-4e64-b33c-326a1e272659_-- --===============1868151323== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls --===============1868151323==--