Re: [tcpinc] Why retain negotatiation

[David Mazieres]

Watson Ladd  writes:

> Dear all,
> Originally negotiation was proposed because EKR wanted to use TLS.
> That has now ended, but we are retaining the negotiation layer with
> far more generality then required. I'm not sure why that is.
> Sincerely,
> Watson

As already noted by Yoav, TLS is just suspended, not ended.

More importantly, even though TCP-ENO was initial born out of
frustration at the working group's indecision over tcpcrypt
vs. TCP-use-TLS, after doing the work we realized that even just for
tcpcrypt, TCP-ENO was a better approach.  It saves us from making
tcpcrypt maximally general (we were able to cut the draft size in half)
and ensures we can take advantage of any future developments such as
large options without predicting them today.

David

___
Tcpinc mailing list
Tcpinc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

Re: [tcpinc] Why retain negotatiation

[Kyle Rose]

+1.

Additionally, there has been interest expressed by others in using the ENO
mechanism for negotiating privacy extensions to TLS, such as disabling SNI
and having the server issue a cert without direct identifying information
(e.g., delivering a nonce instead of a hostname in the CN). Dave Plonka is
scheduled to talk about this briefly at the meeting on Tuesday.

Kyle

On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 7:31 PM, Yoav Nir  wrote:

> IIUC the idea is that the TLS work is not ended, merely suspended, and
> will resume once TLS 1.3 is out the door. Whether that will actually happen
> is of course not known.
>
> Yoav
>
> > On 16 Jul 2016, at 6:58 PM, Watson Ladd  wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> > Originally negotiation was proposed because EKR wanted to use TLS.
> > That has now ended, but we are retaining the negotiation layer with
> > far more generality then required. I'm not sure why that is.
> > Sincerely,
> > Watson
> >
> > ___
> > Tcpinc mailing list
> > Tcpinc@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
>
> ___
> Tcpinc mailing list
> Tcpinc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
>
___
Tcpinc mailing list
Tcpinc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

Re: [tcpinc] Why retain negotatiation

[Yoav Nir]

IIUC the idea is that the TLS work is not ended, merely suspended, and will 
resume once TLS 1.3 is out the door. Whether that will actually happen is of 
course not known.

Yoav

> On 16 Jul 2016, at 6:58 PM, Watson Ladd  wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> Originally negotiation was proposed because EKR wanted to use TLS.
> That has now ended, but we are retaining the negotiation layer with
> far more generality then required. I'm not sure why that is.
> Sincerely,
> Watson
> 
> ___
> Tcpinc mailing list
> Tcpinc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

___
Tcpinc mailing list
Tcpinc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

[tcpinc] Why retain negotatiation

[Watson Ladd]

Dear all,
Originally negotiation was proposed because EKR wanted to use TLS.
That has now ended, but we are retaining the negotiation layer with
far more generality then required. I'm not sure why that is.
Sincerely,
Watson

___
Tcpinc mailing list
Tcpinc@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc