SSL -> TLS

Do you know why SSL became TLS?

Re: SSL -> TLS

Ludovic Joly wrote:
> Do you know why SSL became TLS?

TLS 1.0 is something like SSL 3.1 with a new name. The new name was
given when SSL became a proposed Internet standard.

Yours,
VB.
--
Wenn Du "Ich sehe die Mathematik als einzigen Bereich an, wo es klare
Beweise gibt." und "Ich fuehle mich in einem Anzug unwohl." als Aussagen
mit aequivalentem Meinungsinhalt betrachtest, hast Du mit Deinem Gleichnis
recht. (Michail Bachmann zu Thomas Wallutis in d.a.s.r)

Re: SSL -> TLS

Volker Birk wrote:

> Ludovic Joly wrote:
>> Do you know why SSL became TLS?
>
> TLS 1.0 is something like SSL 3.1 with a new name. The new name was
> given when SSL became a proposed Internet standard.
>
> Yours,
> VB.

AFAIK it went the other way. TLS 1.0 is based on SSL 3.0, but is a little
different. Netscape decided to call it SSL 3.1.

-- Lassi

Re: SSL -> TLS

Lassi Hippeläinen wrote:
> > TLS 1.0 is something like SSL 3.1 with a new name. The new name was
> > given when SSL became a proposed Internet standard.
> AFAIK it went the other way. TLS 1.0 is based on SSL 3.0, but is a little
> different. Netscape decided to call it SSL 3.1.

From RFC 2246:

| 3. Goals of this document
| This document and the TLS protocol itself are based on the SSL 3.0
| Protocol Specification as published by Netscape. The differences
| between this protocol and SSL 3.0 are not dramatic, but they are
| significant enough that TLS 1.0 and SSL 3.0 do not interoperate
| (although TLS 1.0 does incorporate a mechanism by which a TLS
| implementation can back down to SSL 3.0).
| ...
| 6.2.1. Fragmentation
| ...
| version
| The version of the protocol being employed. This document
| describes TLS Version 1.0, which uses the version { 3, 1 }. The
| version value 3.1 is historical: TLS version 1.0 is a minor
| modification to the SSL 3.0 protocol, which bears the version
| value 3.0.

I don't now, if you're right or not ;-)

Yours,
VB.
--
Wenn Du "Ich sehe die Mathematik als einzigen Bereich an, wo es klare
Beweise gibt." und "Ich fuehle mich in einem Anzug unwohl." als Aussagen
mit aequivalentem Meinungsinhalt betrachtest, hast Du mit Deinem Gleichnis
recht. (Michail Bachmann zu Thomas Wallutis in d.a.s.r)

Re: SSL -> TLS

No, nobody wins.

SSL became TLS because it was too obvious SSL actually meant "Secure
Snake oiL".

Sorry :-P

Re: SSL -> TLS

You're all pretty much right. It's as simple as this: TLS is the
successor to SSL.

Why did they (the IETF) change the name instead of staying with SSL?
The IETF tends to march to its own drumbeat, and using a 'proprietary'
or 'marchitecture' name like SSL (contrived by NetScape) is just not
how they do things. They came up with a more 'agnostic' name like TLS.
I wasn't there for the discussion and wasn't involved in this standard,
so I have no idea of course what enamored them of this new
nomenclature.

Joshua Reed

Re: SSL -> TLS

Teddy Ruxpin sez:
> You're all pretty much right. It's as simple as this: TLS is the
> successor to SSL.
>
> Why did they (the IETF) change the name instead of staying with SSL?
> The IETF tends to march to its own drumbeat, and using a 'proprietary'
> or 'marchitecture' name like SSL (contrived by NetScape) is just not
> how they do things. They came up with a more 'agnostic' name like TLS.
> I wasn't there for the discussion and wasn't involved in this standard,
> so I have no idea of course what enamored them of this new
> nomenclature.

Simple: "L as in layer" refers to the network stack. "S as in socket"
refers to BSD networking API. Saying "Secure Socket Layer" is like
saying "Ripe Apple Orange" -- people who actually have a clue will
look at you funny.

HTH
Dima
--
The wombat is a mixture of chalk and clay used for respiration. -- MegaHal

Re: SSL -> TLS

In article <1141324083.231575.55030@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
"Teddy Ruxpin" wrote:

> You're all pretty much right. It's as simple as this: TLS is the
> successor to SSL.
>
> Why did they (the IETF) change the name instead of staying with SSL?
> The IETF tends to march to its own drumbeat, and using a 'proprietary'
> or 'marchitecture' name like SSL (contrived by NetScape) is just not
> how they do things. They came up with a more 'agnostic' name like TLS.
> I wasn't there for the discussion and wasn't involved in this standard,
> so I have no idea of course what enamored them of this new
> nomenclature.

Makes sense to me. SSL stands for Secure Socket Layer, but "socket" is
a construct specific to a particular networking API, it doesn't refer to
anything in the generic network. In fact, the TCP specification refers
to something called a socket, but it's a bit different from what the
sockets API refers to by this term. So it would be confusing to have
another network specification that uses the word in a different way, as
well as seeming to be biased to a particular implementation and/or API.

Transport Layer Security is a reasonable, generic name for what this
does.

--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***

Re: SSL -> TLS

Can't agree with you here, the 'SC' in SCSI stands for Small Computer,
and today's systems continue to unabashedly use the SCSI acronym, even
though its 'interface' is rarely to 'small computers'...

We all know what we mean by SCSI however, just as we'd all know what we
mean by 'SSL.' Pedantic developers aside ;)

Re: SSL -> TLS

In article <1141352573.306043.75520@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Joshua Reed" wrote:

> Can't agree with you here, the 'SC' in SCSI stands for Small Computer,
> and today's systems continue to unabashedly use the SCSI acronym, even
> though its 'interface' is rarely to 'small computers'...

What big computers are there these days?

And isn't SCSI pretty obsolete now, so the meaning is mostly irrelevant?

At least we try to use meaningful acronyms, rather than just naming
things after the organization that defined the spec -- JPEG, MPEG, etc.

--
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***

Re: SSL -> TLS

Barry Margolin sez:
> In article <1141352573.306043.75520@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Joshua Reed" wrote:
>
>> Can't agree with you here, the 'SC' in SCSI stands for Small Computer,
>> and today's systems continue to unabashedly use the SCSI acronym, even
>> though its 'interface' is rarely to 'small computers'...
>
> What big computers are there these days?

Z-series IBMs?

> And isn't SCSI pretty obsolete now, so the meaning is mostly irrelevant?

No, the latest incarnation is SAS and it's alive and well.

Dima
--
"Mirrors and copulation are abominable because they increase the number of
entities." -- corollary to Occam's Razor

Re: SSL -> TLS

Barry Margolin wrote:
> What big computers are there these days?

For example:

http://www.hp.com/products1/servers/integrity/superdome_high _end/index.html
http://www.sun.com/servers/index.jsp?cat=Sun%20Fire%20High-e nd%20Servers&tab=3
http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/hardware/
http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/highe nd/595.html
http://www.sgi.com/products/servers/origin/3000/
http://www.sgi.com/products/servers/altix/clusters/configs.h tml
http://www.sgi.com/products/servers/altix/4000/configs.html
http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/products/bs2000/s_series/s190 .html
http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/products/unix_servers/enterpr ise/primepower_2500.html

> And isn't SCSI pretty obsolete now, so the meaning is mostly irrelevant?

No.

Yours,
VB.
--
Wenn Du "Ich sehe die Mathematik als einzigen Bereich an, wo es klare
Beweise gibt." und "Ich fuehle mich in einem Anzug unwohl." als Aussagen
mit aequivalentem Meinungsinhalt betrachtest, hast Du mit Deinem Gleichnis
recht. (Michail Bachmann zu Thomas Wallutis in d.a.s.r)

Re: SSL -> TLS

Agreed, there's no shortage of large computers.

Further, and I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong :) I think
contemporary SAN uses SCSI, even, and often SPI (SCSI Parallel
Interface). Even when used over GigE (e.g. fibrechannel), it's still
SCSI.

Admittedly, SCSI itself was changed when it became a standard, from
'SASI' to eliminate the whole commercial nomenclature, which I suppose
is actually an argument in *favor* of renaming SSL 'TLS'... ;)