Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol

sorry I'm still missing something about the possible function of the 
registry.

If you have a foo protocol that is used over TLS or may be used directly 
over TCP, then if you see

ALPN: foo

then how does the registry help you determine if this is foo over TLS or 
plaintext foo, since _surely_ you don't put foos in the TLS ALPN, since 
the "next layer" from TLS is not foos, it is foo.

Adrien


------ Original Message ------
From: "Martin Thomson" <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: "Adrien de Croy" <adrien@qbik.com>
Cc: "Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu>; "Amos Jeffries" <squid3@treenet.co.nz>; 
"HTTP Working Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 30/03/2015 4:54:16 p.m.
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call for 
draft-ietf-httpbis-tunnel-protocol

>On 29 March 2015 at 20:12, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:
>>
>>  I think renaming to ALPN addresses a couple of issues, but still not 
>>the one
>>  about whether it's being used for a TLS-wrapped protocol or bare 
>>protocol.
>
>Correct. The registry will have to serve there. The presence or
>absence of TLS is arguably of little value in cases where the protocol
>is unknown anyway: unless you have some sort of magic I don't know of.

Received on Monday, 30 March 2015 11:45:26 UTC