Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] lasgt call comments (st Call: draft-altman-tls-channel-bindings (Channel Bindings for TLS) to Proposed Standard))

[Michael D'Errico <[e-mail]>]

I don't pretend to know exactly what this feature is supposed to do,
but I think using the word "connection" would be a mistake given its
widespread use meaning TCP connections, etc.

Perhaps using a different word such as "link" would portray the
meaning you want without causing confusion?

Mike



> Could we somehow refer to this? Perhaps:
> 
>   Note: We define a new "TLS connection" to start when the client
>   sends an unencrypted (TLS_NULL_WITH_NULL_NULL cipher suite) Client
>   Hello message (which can lead to either a full handshake, or
>   resuming a session). Renegotiation (sending a Client Hello protected
>   under some other cipher suite) does not start a new "TLS connection".  
>   Note that this is separate from any notion of "connection", if any, 
>   in the underlying transport protocol (such as TCP or UDP).
> 
> (Is this consistent with what the existing implementations do?)
> 
> Best regards,
> Pasi