Subject: Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc4492bis-00.txt

From: Peter Gutmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 07:47:23 +0000

Viktor Dukhovni <[email-masked]> writes:

>a server that wants to use ECDSA when possible, but still wants to
>interoperate with more than just a select few clients really SHOULD have both
>ECDSA and RSA certificates.

Do you want to be the one to tell your CIO that the CA tax on their entire
server infrastructure just doubled, all in the name of making a fashion
statement?

Peter.

---

From: Viktor Dukhovni <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 08:27:20 +0000

> server infrastructure just doubled, all in the name of making a fashion

For HTTPS, at this time often no, especially not given what EV
certs typically cost.

For SMTP with DANE, the marginal cost for a TLSA record is zero.
Twice zero is still zero.  

However, the Let's Encrypt price for "DV" (Domain not Validated,
or perhaps Definitively Vacuous) certs may again turn out to be a
solution of $2x = x$.  And I think they are not first to offer
"free" certs, though the deployment cost in administrator effort
may be where they prove to be cheaper if successful.

Also in terms of software support, IIRC OpenSSL prior to the not
quite yet released 1.0.2 does not process chain files for multiple
certificates as well as one might expect (there are work-arounds).

So I am not expecting multi-certificate deployments (and thus any
ECDSA deployments) to become mainstream in the very near term.

-- 
	Viktor.