IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] draft-ray-tls-encrypted-handshake-00.txt

Adam Langley <agl@chromium.org> Fri, 04 May 2012 16:45 UTC

Return-Path: <agl@google.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 418F021F861B for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:45:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mmVZdYmJv9RN for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:45:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-f44.google.com (mail-yw0-f44.google.com [209.85.213.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60C1521F861A for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:45:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yhq56 with SMTP id 56so3558635yhq.31 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 May 2012 09:45:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :x-system-of-record; bh=+QOdJZn7d5fO5X0iD+CbZvr5JNLA4pNB9xaQm54goMI=; b=JQ7UDVT3m8pIpTGN7nmJlTk32DWDBZ+T5YAC2I6NRwKdMiEo+WxECMI/O55V1j64Fd GvHhcKRZWw+6aFh/KM47SF+YYfQM69WHoISFjWhUmvWIwS5z886yafGwfWXsEYZxfCVl ntMS9UMAGYf63v9oZJZ+vlZK1+VjnVOITTeQNzz2Wpt8kMdLcsJMaOzrydx2rIK+BfCl KWBnkexgiG09P/QXqUdMVztHOuJEkWfYa7GvKnZYldTzvXm0eWrMkhGBytRgcqXMX1xU WBFt81Gf0PWt8p1qWyh3/bdCnG+wfKOmF5+s6v0H1OgtVAt9jez1it08hPIb7GhuVKA9 fbow==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :x-system-of-record:x-gm-message-state; bh=+QOdJZn7d5fO5X0iD+CbZvr5JNLA4pNB9xaQm54goMI=; b=C/sTNhpf/Bu2oWc1tsPeFn1JhW46uDos3j9fOkYXm1qvPefAcBF5mIk7WA1BojH4p2 IWYJa/N30lydw4kjU9WneaIz9fynt5gdDLPJyyM45/FG1Bro+PNDfHF6CH0j+E1hnYyX RuPHZmUfqX366YN03lzZ/iKG85wqGAzriVzX/OMUJ8OZQU752DPnEq49uylJTFvTccMY JUDofp2lL03FKr9xfFhr8YNIu5l1vwlYcb2dRmRdNlrAOFv7Gioqf/1lFd9ANm30JDWs aqIcQKcevPTPXk/ZLTzsJhTak9z6krzIJrfWJvT+cYHHaFLkfkclCxboJGowkciWbf8Z tDNw==
Received: by 10.60.3.34 with SMTP id 2mr926605oez.27.1336149440691; Fri, 04 May 2012 09:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.3.34 with SMTP id 2mr926598oez.27.1336149440591; Fri, 04 May 2012 09:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: agl@google.com
Received: by 10.182.98.193 with HTTP; Fri, 4 May 2012 09:37:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4FA401F7.5060003@extendedsubset.com>
References: <4FA401F7.5060003@extendedsubset.com>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 12:37:20 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: _vF_c9Gtc-00gKnTA_P4pYEIfc4
Message-ID: <CAL9PXLyrbOrnK0cKVz0-p+LRLkDaeUhc5O2Q_+THGxaZA2RSPQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Langley <agl@chromium.org>
To: Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-System-Of-Record: true
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmBWGPXg/w9heQcKYZMhtFlyAxb8IlWPnhjrm3RIUoLW7mwhSUgmqoKi6TE1akL36Od+8nFm0cK4SuXxCOYZZIBHtmD8QjMreBZh4G2eWZYwdILhl/6EWIC4SSkN2orlXurNqp4
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] draft-ray-tls-encrypted-handshake-00.txt
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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/options/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: Fri, 04 May 2012 16:45:37 -0000

On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com> wrote:
> I would appreciate it if the participants of the TLS WG will give this draft
> a reading and serious consideration to taking it up as a work item:

Marsh was good enough to share an early draft of this with me.

For now I would like to gloss over the details of the proposal in
order to concentrate on the intention:

I believe that this would be beneficial. It rather neatly solves the
encrypted client certificates problem and, probably, others in the
future. It would allow NPN to encrypt both the server's protocols and
the client's selection without additional round trips.

I would like to commend the idea to the working group.


Cheers

AGL

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email