Re: [kitten] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-kitten-tls-channel-bindings-for-tls13-09

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

On 15/10/2021 14:41, Sam Whited wrote:
> As I've mentioned before to you, I don't believe it updates this
> document in any way as the statement about unique master secrets in that
> document is still true either way and does not need to be modified. I'm
> not against adding this if others also agree, but I just don't see it.
As RFC 7677 only specifies use of "tls-unique" as 
mandatory-to-implement, I agree that it should be updated to point to 
your draft.
> Maybe you could propose some text for how you think it updates 7677 or
> where you think a reference to 7677 would be appropriate and that would
> make things more clear?

How about a short new section ("Update to RFC 7677") that contains 
something like the following:

    As "tls-unique" channel binding is not defined for TLS 1.3 [RFC8446],
    when using SCRAM-SHA-256/SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS over TLS 1.3, the
    "tls-exporter" channel binding [tls-1.3-channel-binding] MUST be the
    default channel binding (in the sense specified in Section 6.1 of
    [RFC5802]) to use.    Note that this document doesn't change the default
    channel binding to use for SCRAM-SHA-256/SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS over TLS 1.2
    [RFC5246], which is still "tls-unique".

Best Regards,

Alexey
> —Sam
>
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2021, at 18:12, Ludovic BOCQUET wrote:
>> It is possible to add in "Updates": 7677?
>>
>> In the text too?
>>
>> And at the bottom:
>>
>> [RFC7677]  Tony Hansen,              "SCRAM-SHA-256 and SCRAM-SHA-256-
>> PLUS Simple              Authentication and Security Layer (SASL)
>> Mechanisms",              RFC7677, DOI 10.17487/RFC7677, November
>> 2015,              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7677>.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.