Re: draft agenda for San Jose meeting

At 8:49 AM -0800 12/2/96, Matt Hur wrote:
>I'm just looking for some clarification.
>- Is it the intention to move SSL 3.0 into TLS 1.0 "as is", with
>clarifications to the spec?

Not necessarily -- a number of clarifications (but no changes to the SSL
protocol) have been made in "draft-ietf-tls-protocol-00.txt" (it was
submitted before the IETF cutoff deadline but is not up on ietf
internet-drafts site yet) as well as a document
"draft-ietf-tls-changes-00.txt" that includes what the editors (Tim and I)
felt to be non-controversial changes.

The short outline of "tls-changes" is:

	1. MAC algorithm
	2. MAC contents
	3. Block padding
	4. Message order standardization
	5. Certificate chain contents
	6. The no_certificate alert
	7. Additional alerts
	8. Seperation of Record and Handshake layers
	9. Additional Record Protocol clients

If these drafts are not up by today I'll be glad to send them to anyone
that needs a copy if you send me a private mail (please don't send your
request to the list.)

>- Is the hour of presentation and discussion meant for clarifying the
>ambiguities in SSL 3.0 that Chris Allen mentioned in an earlier message,
>also, does this include discussion about splitting the SSL spec into
>separate specification documents?

The focus of the discussion during that portion of the agenda will be
"draft-ietf-tls-changes-00.txt" and to get a straw vote on them, howerever,
I expect that this time will also include some straw votes on additional
requirements.

>- Does this mean that all decisions regarding draft proposals (Netscape's
>authority attributes, Microsoft's passphrase authentication, CyberSafe's
>Kerberos cipher suites, etc.) will be postponed until the next meeting of
>the IETF?

If there are no requirements beyond "draft-ietf-tls-changes-00.txt", they
will be integrated into "draft-ietf-tls-protocol-00.txt" which will then be
put out for a last call. In this case, as all of the additions were
discussed during the meeting I think that TLS could be approved as an RFC
more rapidly then the next meeting. However, if more requirements are
added, it will definately take one more more meetings longer to finalize.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
..Christopher Allen                  Consensus Development Corporation..
..<ChristopherA@consensus.com>                 1563 Solano Avenue #355..
..                                             Berkeley, CA 94707-2116..
..Home of "SSL Plus:                      o510/559-1500  f510/559-1505..
..  SSL 3.0 Integration Suite(tm)" <http://www.consensus.com/SSLPlus/>..

Received on Monday, 2 December 1996 13:10:21 UTC