W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-tls@w3.org > January to March 1997

Re: secure tcp ports

From: Mark Shuttleworth <marks@thawte.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:59:51 +0200 (SAT)
To: billo@server.net
cc: chk@gnu.ai.mit.edu, ietf-tls@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95q.970207105400.111N-100000@bilbo.thawte.com>
Hiya

Most protocols have a clearly defined server response to unknown client
requests (much like the HTML "if you don't know it ignore it" rule).  IOW,
if a news server gets a strange command from a client,  the protocol says
it must return with something like "500 Que?".

"nntps" just means "establish a secure news connection.  fail if you
cannot".  Whether that secure connection goes to the same or a different
port is immaterial.  Saying that the same port is more subject to DOS
attacks is silly:  you wouldn;t expect Navigator to connect to port 80 if
port 443 failed,  would you?

I think all:

   - command oriented
   - interactive

protocols  (NNTP, SMTP, POP3,  IMAP4 etc) can be upgraded to support TLS
negotiation just by the addition of a single client command.  Making the
server be able to initiate secure session negotiation is harder because
most of these protocols are client-driven.  But I'll comment further on
Monday.

--
Mark Shuttleworth
Thawte Consulting
Received on Friday, 7 February 1997 04:00:34 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:34:58 EDT