Re: rfc2487bis-04: Failed negotiations & virtual hosting

[dean gaudet <dgaudet-list-ietf-apps-tls@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 09:27:41AM -0700, dean gaudet wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Oct 2000, Lutz Jaenicke wrote:
> > > extend STARTTLS to "STARTTLS required_target", but this would in fact
> > > change the protocol. And it would give away some of the privacy obtained
> > > as an eavesdropper could derive information about the email being sent.
> > 
> > as opposed to the alternative of allocating an IP address per domain?  
> > that's the only way to host multiple certificates today.
> 
> Yes. That is today's solution. We are looking for a better one, like the
> people trying to improve HTTP/TLS. 

sorry i wasn't clear -- what i meant is that there's no more information
revealed in a multiple IP solution (today) vs. an exposed hostname
solution a la HTTP Upgrade (which as i said in another message i'd rather
see as part of TLS rather than making a change to every application
protocol).

-dean