Re: [tram] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-tram-alpn-06.txt> (Application Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN) labels for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Usages) to Proposed Standard

Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 28 October 2014 09:46 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 343F01A1AD9 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:46:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 aspu_PlYMIvH for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x231.google.com (mail-ob0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D0271A1AB7 for <tram@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:46:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ob0-f177.google.com with SMTP id m8so202460obr.8 for <tram@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xqwftas3cOr0mQA5ABD0v3q5xKq05LpfQ2ynrJGbDBU=; b=L0PFfCSHDQoaLwc+3qRV9RXPOp4EGF2TlHMjSVKUjZxkQhtHEN7Oo73poYqjzxEHIM SqUHWY7a8/fc265CO1wkANIgl24mUbhwb40TAUsYHWliKjEtgGyWvhKJ9yWEv9XO55kn 39z/93MCBnRvp6yf1lKWfqImiuUysO8IYCQZKE41zWTYneqEghauDYY3ZCszZFFmYILx AnOjF37q+raMSz+CNJsNGswXQX+wQBBGBByOXhDeYCT9t1+qhIJe0DH9vvPYyomURXaR fixFvcwvrWosA2ImMwNViacTTVEvCHQ4uFYWisjSfAaFWS9CxcZXELnGDZEZzgfdU+Gu SEsA==
X-Received: by 10.202.75.202 with SMTP id y193mr1873056oia.56.1414489593082; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2605:6000:9004:ce00:88c:24f6:be8f:8d9? ([2605:6000:9004:ce00:88c:24f6:be8f:8d9]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w6sm436125obz.20.2014.10.28.02.46.30 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:46:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <544F65F4.5080305@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 04:46:28 -0500
From: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <CAMfhd9VXA2aqB7hF6TyP10dW0x1y5uM_UEgM7JuQB9yPW8B+Kg@mail.gmail.com> <544E938B.1030802@gmail.com> <544EE046.5080101@cs.tcd.ie> <CABkgnnUCoFTL5DC+Eq1oLkZU4ahkkc6Hw8nYUvayn-VFKbkHUQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUCoFTL5DC+Eq1oLkZU4ahkkc6Hw8nYUvayn-VFKbkHUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/pWiUKV0e_LutnMantL9H85IX0bQ
Cc: Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org>, Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>, Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>, tls chair <tls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tram] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-tram-alpn-06.txt> (Application Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN) labels for Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Usages) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussing the creation of a Turn Revised And Modernized \(TRAM\) WG, which goal is to consolidate the various initiatives to update TURN and STUN." <tram.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tram/>
List-Post: <mailto:tram@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:46:36 -0000

On 10/27/2014 07:37 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 27 October 2014 17:16, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>> Not sure we're in a position to write ALPN guidance as you'd
>> like right now, but were it just a paragraph like the above,
>> then we could. I'd ask Adam L. to write that though others
>> could be as good.
>
> I think that my review strongly suggested removal of that text.  I
> generally concur with agl on this point.  There are potentially even
> cases where the intermediary won't see the initial round of the
> handshake, so there is no chance of even seeing what *might* be
> negotiated (not that you should be basing any decision on this marking
> anyway).
>
> Basically, this hook might be in the clear, or it might not.  Don't
> expect to hang anything heavy on it.

So, you guys are the experts on this. Please feel free to clue me in.

What I was getting from Adam's Last Call comment was that this was a 
futures thing in the TLS working group, and that when the TLS working 
group delivers and what they deliver gets deployed, middleboxes won't be 
able to make policy decisions on based on ALPN labels because they'll be 
encrypted, so remove the text about making policy decisions based on 
ALPN labels because that will stop working.

What I was asking, was whether there was any reason to point out that 
until the TLS working group delivers, this is a possibility.

The current text included this possibility as a feature, and I 
understood Adam to be objecting to that characterization.

What I'm getting from this exchange is that it's not necessary to point 
out this possibility in the TRAM document as bug, either, because the 
bug applies to all ALPN labels, not just this one.

So, delete the existing text and don't add anything.

Am I tracking the conversation?

Thanks,

Spencer