IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Analysis of Interop scenarios TLS extension RI w/MCSV

Nelson B Bolyard <nelson@bolyard.me> Fri, 11 December 2009 02:23 UTC

Return-Path: <nelson@bolyard.me>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CFC3A6897 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:23:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.521
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.078, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cOXyn4GDehE1 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:23:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpauth20.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpauth20.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7D47B3A6843 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:23:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 4195 invoked from network); 11 Dec 2009 02:22:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (24.5.142.42) by smtpauth20.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.36) with ESMTP; 11 Dec 2009 02:22:52 -0000
Message-ID: <4B21ACFD.8010701@bolyard.me>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:22:53 -0800
From: Nelson B Bolyard <nelson@bolyard.me>
Organization: Network Security Services
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; rv:1.9.1b1pre) Gecko/20081004 NOT Firefox/2.0 SeaMonkey/2.0a2pre
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tls@ietf.org
References: <OF077778A0.30F948CF-ON4A257687.007F44D3-4A257688.000C7CE6@au1.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <OF077778A0.30F948CF-ON4A257687.007F44D3-4A257688.000C7CE6@au1.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [TLS] Analysis of Interop scenarios TLS extension RI w/MCSV
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 11 Dec 2009 02:23:06 -0000

On 2009-12-09 18:16 PST, Michael Gray wrote:

> Given this large test impact I find the
> draft-mrex-tls-secure-renegotiation-03 alternate solution (which does not
> require full extension implementation) to be preferable.

Of course, neither does draft-ietf-tls-renegotiation-01.txt require full
extension implementation, so the absence of that requirements is not a
basis for preference of one over the other.

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status