Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 process

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Gutmann" <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
To: <tls@ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 3:32 AM
> Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net> writes:
>
<snip>
> +1.  I haven't said much so far because it seems the 1.3 effort is
making
> steady progress towards the design-by-committee mess that make
IKEv1/IPsec
> such a winner, but I would much prefer the approach of "set
boundaries, people
> have six months to submit designs, and then a bake-off".  TLS 1.2,
which
> seemed to consist mostly of gratuitous tweaking of 1.1, has taken
years to see
> any uptake (SSL Pulse says about 30%, only slightly above SSLv2, and
that's
> for the Alexa top 200K, not the entire net, which I'd expect to be far
worse
> than that), if 1.3 is even more of 1.2 then who knows how long that'll
take
> before we see any real uptake.
>
> In fact I'd be prepared to argue that any work on TLS 1.3 or 2 or
whatever
> it's going to be is premature when the vast majority of the net
doesn't even
> do TLS 1.1 yet, let alone 1.2.  What we'll end up with is a bunch of
major
> sites doing it and, over a period of several years, browsers gradually
> introducing support (Firefox took what, five years?).  So if the
history of
> TLS 1.1/1.2 is anything to go by, anything we standardise now may
start
> seeing significant deployment in about the 2020-2025 time frame.

True, but I see another requirement on the TLS WG.  As and when we
become aware of a new and credible threat, then we should develop a
counter for it so that when disaster strikes some part of the Internet
as a result of an attack based on the threat, we can say, 'Here is the
solution, go implement'.

Tom Petch

>
> Peter.
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls