[RHCE] TLS vs. SSL discussion

[Jeremy Portzer]

--=-4ps0egyDtNE+N9YqDzFA
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 2003-04-17 at 14:57, Mike Broome wrote:

>=20
> I was going to look this up today, but you beat me to it. :)
>=20
> So we were both right.=20

Yep.

> I still disagree with your statement that "TLS
> and SSL are the same thing".=20

I should have said "in practice" -- as we've seen, there are slight
differences per the spec.

> From the RFC I see that they are not, and
> TLS is, as I suspected, slightly changed from SSL.  (That's what
> standards bodies live to do. :)
>=20
> But that's mostly a semantic distinction since the reality of it is that
> the two are fully interoperable and interchangeable when TLS operates
> using the "mechanism by which a TLS implementation can back down to SSL
> 3.0"
>=20
> Thanks for sending out the info.  I don't think Jason's going to get the
> fight he was hoping for.

Surely we can think of something else to fight over.  Jason, any ideas?=20
;-)

--Jeremy
=20
--=20
/=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D\
| Jeremy Portzer       jeremyp@pobox.com       trilug.org/~jeremy     |
| GPG Fingerprint: 712D 77C7 AB2D 2130 989F  E135 6F9F F7BC CC1A 7B92 |
\=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D/

--=-4ps0egyDtNE+N9YqDzFA
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA+nvt1b5/3vMwae5IRAgWpAJ9pMGVUbDDMczb88SsFAa107b9ODACgsCPm
ob/oZu3TEGCeuBE/PwjMOoE=
=gLap
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-4ps0egyDtNE+N9YqDzFA--