Re: [nfsv4] Martin Duke's Discuss on draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-tls-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 01:56:10PM -0700, Martin Duke via Datatracker wrote:
> Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-tls-08: Discuss
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-nfsv4-rpc-tls/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This presumably a trivial fix but I think it's important enough to be a DISCUSS:
> 
> I think the document needs some discussion of the security properties of TLS1.3
> early data over TCP, if only to refer to Section 8 of RFC 8446 (replay) and
> mention that it is not forward-secure, unlike the rest of the payload.

I actually think that the situation is well-defined without such additional
text -- Appendix E.5 notes that:

   Application protocols MUST NOT use 0-RTT data without a profile that
   defines its use.  That profile needs to identify which messages or
   interactions are safe to use with 0-RTT and how to handle the
   situation when the server rejects 0-RTT and falls back to 1-RTT.

Since this document does not provide such a profile, early data MUST NOT be
used, and there's no need to say more.

-Ben