Re: [TLS] Proposed text for dnsssec chain extension draft

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 09:57:22AM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:51:58AM +0200, Melinda Shore wrote:
> > On 4/25/18 7:33 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > > Perhaps a concrete proposal will make it
> > > easier to reach a mutually-agreeable consensus position, and make it
> > > clear that the requested 16-bits are a reasonable consensus outcome.
> > 
> > Hi, Viktor:
> > 
> > This doesn't actually reflect the consensus called by the
> > chairs, as I understand what was posted.  It may be useful
> > to start work on a new draft describing your proposal.
> 
> The chair said there is consensus for (A) with no pinning.  Viktor's
> proposal is (A) with no pinning.  It's not at all clear to me that the
> two reserved bytes are outside the consensus, and anyways, their cost is
> minimal.
> 
> However, if you object to turning the extension contents into a struct,
> then I would propose a slight tweak to Viktor's proposal:
> 
>    Two-byte elements of the AuthenticationChain are reserved for future
>    use.  Pending future specifications, clients MUST discard any two-
>    byte elements of the AuthenticationChain, and servers MUST NOT send
>    any such elements.

Ay, never mind, this isn't XDR, so that wouldn't work.