Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs
| От | Daniel Gustafsson |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AC869D2D-4D85-479B-8007-D0ADC667D56A@yesql.se обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs
Re: SSL/TLS instead of SSL in docs |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On 30 Jun 2021, at 20:20, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > I am not in favor of this direction. I think it just adds tediousness and doesn't really help anyone. If we are worriedabout correct terminology, then we should just change everything to TLS. I actually think SSL/TLS has won the debate of "correct terminology" for describing a secure connection encrypted by a TLS protocol. > If we are not, then saying SSL is enough. I think consistency is the interesting aspect here. We already have a mix of SSL, TLS and SSL/TLS (although heavily skewed towards SSL) so we should settle on one and stick to it. The arguments in the NSS thread which led to this pointed to SSL/TLS. If we feel that the churn isn't worth it, then we should change all to SSL and perhaps instead just add TLS as indexterms to those sections. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: