[TLS] RFC8446 backward compatibility question

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Thu, 05 August 2021 20:44 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 3CCBB3A085A for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 13:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.119
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.119 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uEAiDwZlA5_d for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 13:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 967F33A0852 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 13:44:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:51]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B1D5548042 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 22:43:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 5F9D44E7C51; Thu, 5 Aug 2021 22:43:55 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 22:43:55 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: tls@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20210805204355.GB57091@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/s94P0HmVE3s2CMqUXqaviz-Q-Ec>
Subject: [TLS] RFC8446 backward compatibility question
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 05 Aug 2021 20:44:10 -0000

I am trying to figure out if every implementation compliant with
RFC8446 is also necessarily interoperable with an RFC5246 peer, or if this
is just a likely common, but still completely optional implementation choice.

I could not find any explicit statement that backward compatibility
with RFC5246 is mandatory (but i just was doing browsing/keyword search
over RFC8446). COnditional text such as:

"implementations which support both TLS 1.3 and earlier versions SHOULD"

make me think that TLS 1.2 backward compatibility is just optional.

Thanks
    Toerless