Re: [TLS] Bakeoffs

[Alfredo Pironti <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Juho Vähä-Herttua <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> On 16.4.2014, at 13.42, Alfredo Pironti <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Juho Vähä-Herttua <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>> If someone is trying to get funding for TLS 2.0 and cannot get it because
>> of the consensus in this WG, they should definitely bring it to discussion
>> on this mailing list. Otherwise I think the topic is slightly speculative.
>>
>
> This is not speculative. I work in the academia, and right now I'm
> refraining to invest my time (let alone funds) into a TLS proposal because,
> in the absence of a call for proposals, I deem my time is better invested
> in other activities.
>
>
> Thanks for coming forward, so I stand corrected that the issue is not
> speculative.
>

Well, it's just me ;-)


>
> That said, I'll admit that, as long as we have to stick with the current
> Client/ServerHello negotiation and client speaks first, I see much of the
> progress one can make being incremental, rather than radically new.
>
>
> Let's just hope the discussion keeps going after the TLSv1.3 issue is
> resolved. The WG had a lot of inactivity between TLSv1.2 and now that could
> have been used better, but it seems that only after several big exploits
> people are suddenly interested in TLS again.
>

After all, I do agree with the chairs that progress on TLS is more urgent
than meta-discussion (so, sorry chairs for keeping this thread alive! I'll
stop now!). And although seeing handshake messages encapsulated in
ClientHello extensions does make me feel a bit sick, I acknowledge that,
without changing the well-known port for "protocol x over TLS", none of the
radical changes I'd like to see can happen.

Alfredo


>
>
> Juho
>
>