Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Remove EndOfEarlyData from TLS (#1792)

[Kazuho Oku <[e-mail]>]

kazuho commented on this pull request.



> @@ -1107,6 +1107,21 @@ of the handshake, they cannot be fully trusted until the handshake completes,
 and reliance on them should be minimized.  However, any tampering with the
 parameters will cause the handshake to fail.
 
+Endpoints MUST NOT send this extension in a TLS connection that does not use
+QUIC (such as the use of TLS with TCP defined in {{!TLS13}}).  A fatal
+unsupported_extension alert MUST be sent if this extension is received when the
+transport is not QUIC.
+
+
+## Removing the EndOfEarlyData Message {#remove-eoed}
+
+Negotiating the quic_transport_parameters extension also modifies TLS to remove
+the EndOfEarlyData message.  QUIC does not rely on this message to mark the end

My preference goes to simply stating that we do not use EOED in QUIC, rather than stating that the use of a particular extension signals the omission (I assume that is what @siyengar suggested).

My read is that the proposed text expects the stacks to be implemented in either of the following two ways, which seems like an unnecessary complication to me:
* making TLS stacks depend on an extension defined outside of TLS
* let the server-side QUIC stack modify the flag of the TLS stack (signaling the omission) when it processes ClientHello

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1792#pullrequestreview-158673698