On Thursday, September 01, 2016 03:17:50 pm Julien ÉLIE wrote: > There's still something I find confusing: on the one hand, SSL is badly > broken and "diediedied", it is a proprietary protocol name, and the > consensus in the TLS WG seems to be "long live TLS" but on the other > hand major SSL/TLS implementations keep the SSL name living.
Arguably, renaming SSL to TLS and restarting the version numbering was a bad decision. SSL/TLS is a 21 year old protocol. It's got more than a few bad decisions in it, at least in hindsight. I too wish that major organizations would ditch the SSL naming for TLS, however until very recently many still supported SSL in some form (which is it's own problem). It is unfortunately not easy to convince everyone to update things. Dave _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
