On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 6:43 AM, Mateusz Jończyk <[email protected]> wrote:

> W dniu 04.01.2018 o 15:22, Eric Rescorla pisze:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 2:46 AM, Mateusz Jończyk <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     W dniu 03.01.2018 o 18:05, Benjamin Kaduk pisze:
> >     > On 01/03/2018 10:17 AM, Mateusz Jończyk wrote:
> >     >> Judging from TLS1.3's problems with middleboxes, content
> filtering isn't so
> >     >> rare, especially in the corporate world.
> >     >>
> >     >> The provider of filtering services (for example OpenDNS) /
> middlebox
> >     >> manufacturer would have to recognize if the client supports this
> mechanism.
> >     >> Having support for TLS1.3 could be one such flag.
> >     >
> >     > Cherry-picking this one part just for enhanced clarity: I do not
> think
> >     > support for TLS 1.3 can or should be such a flag -- there does not
> seem
> >     > sufficient reason to block TLS 1.3 finalization for this proposal.
> >
> >     I would like to ask You to add just this one flag:
> >     access_administratively_disabled to TLS 1.3. This will allow
> graceful upgrade to
> >     full proposed functionality of the access_administratively_disabled
> mechanism.
> >
> >
> > I am not in favor of this change at this time.
> >
> > I suspect I'm not in favor of the mechanism, but i'm definitely not in
> favor of
> > adding a placeholder alert for some mechanism which isn't specified.
> >
> OK, but what about this change considered separately? I have changed the
> semantics slightly:
>
> +access_denied_by_intermediary
> +: The access was denied by a network intermediary - i.e. a server other
> +  than the client or the desired server, for example by an Internet Sevice
> +  Provider.
>
> Justification:
>         Network intermediaries (for example ISPs) may block traffic by
> using
>         e.g. access_denied anyway. Make it more explicit by adding
>         access_denied_by_intermediary.
>
>         This will make censorship more transparent.
>

Sorry, no, I'm not persuaded. It's not clear to me that this is a benefit,
and certainly
not clear enough to merit a last minute change to 1.3.

-Ekr


> Greetings,
> Mateusz
>
>
> > -Ekr
> >
> >     I will try to submit an Internet Draft for the full mechanism till
> the end of
> >     this week.
> >
> >     Greetings,
> >     Mateusz Jończyk
> >
> >     >
> >     > -Ben
> >     >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     TLS mailing list
> >     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
> >     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>
> >
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to