IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] draft-ietf-tls-tls13-21 posted

Benjamin Kaduk <bkaduk@akamai.com> Fri, 07 July 2017 16:40 UTC

Return-Path: <bkaduk@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D2B13170C for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 09:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kaxQuxD48Unh for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 09:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C0DE1316FB for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 09:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v67Gc0UA028825; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:40:25 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=subject : to : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type; s=jan2016.eng; bh=P7NbvI6LqmVKtOn5rFI+LLv+xSPrtw/7Qe1bu+MHG7k=; b=cYAUPp5MLBjT3za+nxRxuQJFlWWeBR5+yv/ufWLD75EJcc6J3S0Y6dUa5kpZzLfTR8V6 ZppL7UbnnmAq41z34/+9pm3+bdtAlqwBYEZJOsBtRR+u45Exc0RLMWUP2y+K/FeZIqG8 S4bn8sFcJ9BbtqFCUccwuPnduJR/Ep4Ogv59TN34c8nkfaFL2vmUv0/EJP56QCHQVw6R BbC9a9M3AqPC1b3jlbD+8RflgSTT6xqdQQ2Ie0XUYCucF14fWumtt9Yz4G05K79HT1ov Q5yho56wMSakCqwoU7ja65bBT+9+lKEHBUlpk/KZqTYeahP8snmg+0GlWzX6bUmJ1tZN 4w==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint4 ([96.6.114.87]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2bj21kahj9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 07 Jul 2017 17:40:24 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v67Gaj8q013831; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 12:40:23 -0400
Received: from prod-mail-relay15.akamai.com ([172.27.17.40]) by prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2be72vmtp6-1; Fri, 07 Jul 2017 12:40:23 -0400
Received: from [172.19.17.86] (bos-lpczi.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.19.17.86]) by prod-mail-relay15.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BDD720064; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 10:40:23 -0600 (MDT)
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
References: <CABcZeBN7vJXZJadNzPR5RbWwZpgM+NgjW7FvuJW+Q5cNUu6_FQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Benjamin Kaduk <bkaduk@akamai.com>
Message-ID: <2987d9d7-b08a-d3ee-3607-d7e6d0bbbda6@akamai.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 11:40:22 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBN7vJXZJadNzPR5RbWwZpgM+NgjW7FvuJW+Q5cNUu6_FQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------0462D8056A694CDFD51EEC41"
Content-Language: en-US
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-07-07_08:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1707070276
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-07-07_08:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1707070277
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/5d7uUKFyqVkXzqbQyb9YfM3IUaw>
Subject: Re: [TLS] draft-ietf-tls-tls13-21 posted
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:40:30 -0000

On 07/03/2017 07:01 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Currently the extension table says that server_certificate_type goes
> in the Certificate message, whereas client_certificate_type does
> not. My reasoning for the latter is that the extensions are attached
> to individual certificate elements, so it was non-sensical to have a
> situation where you might have cert A be X.509 and cert B be PGP.  I
> think we should just change server_certificate_type to go in EE, and
> then maybe in future if people want something cleverer they can add it
> then. I didn't want to do this without WG discussion, but I think we
> should and if people don't object I'll do it in a -22.
>

Seems worth doing.


[snip]

>
> [0] Note that this is a bit tricky when you are also streaming
> Early Data.

I'm not sure what this footnote was supposed to refer to.

-Ben

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email