- From: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Sat, 02 May 2015 21:02:11 +0000
- To: "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "Mike Bishop" <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Barry Leiba" <barryleiba@computer.org>, "draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol.shepherd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol.shepherd@ietf.org>, "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
------ Original Message ------ From: "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com> To: "Mike Bishop" <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> Cc: "Barry Leiba" <barryleiba@computer.org>; "draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol@ietf.org>; "draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol.shepherd@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol.shepherd@ietf.org>; "HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Sent: 2/05/2015 6:26:34 a.m. Subject: Re: AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol-03 >On 1 May 2015 at 11:14, Mike Bishop <Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com> >wrote: >>> The ALPN identifier and registry are used to identify a protocol, >>>not >>> a single protocol layer or component. >> >> This feels like the same issue from the other thread -- this phrasing >>makes it sound like you mean "protocol" to imply a stack/suite, "not a >>single protocol layer..." So now we're not just overloading the ALPN >>registry, we're overloading the word protocol! > >On the contrary, protocol layers != protocols. I disagree IP is a protocol TCP is a protocol TLS is a protocol HTTP is a protocol > >> If it's TLS, this header copies the list from the ClientHello field; >>if it's not TLS, it contains the token that would be in ALPN if the >>client wanted to negotiate this protocol over TLS. > >Except that if it was over TLS it would be a different thing entirely. >
Received on Saturday, 2 May 2015 21:04:07 UTC