Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-ticketrequests

"Martin Thomson" <> Wed, 06 November 2019 01:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F78D12022D for <>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:32:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=n1UmFEVF; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=hdrrWbbG
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2G90pR69V_Bo for <>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:32:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09DF7120041 for <>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:32:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6394121A92 for <>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 20:32:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imap2 ([]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 05 Nov 2019 20:32:32 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=+IDzNGt4tsWe7Xm8GjsCdcSR1v1E2lM liQ5utTHUvFw=; b=n1UmFEVFHMYLuHBh4bisvrJ0r01fBfr05XOSekXuA24zaCu jQYTORI16p0KSstc3cOhA16cvpH2d3fywWoDNfVEuzA2fK0FKrbb6ggvblBn+JZa MIF0WIPEP/tMcL0XrXkszrcxtI3KxP/BJsA9BCXbZ/szol4/cFUBknUIBjV5w1g4 w7ZXh4BPp4wBnE0qNPpjm9l3zbAimAppomzTC7cMGeC4qs9tgQnQp1k+4t0qJfSo BIhinefyYQjKCDNml9VMyvXstN5mX87I6SEym0ebPqD0RjqSwv8BdKbI20zuw6g6 RlV0epVuMzxz8fwCzMzNVayG29BbWismxGuw2gQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=+IDzNG t4tsWe7Xm8GjsCdcSR1v1E2lMliQ5utTHUvFw=; b=hdrrWbbGLkrZzX046/6ZYL v/Apw9kxRDYXuWshuUY0OEn+g2h2UlUq0dptpWqYH7q4ZqZ4ekKhEoQokDh2WXe2 4kjaCq7qqhLS5ddLHpElxwCf1HVFzlRPyxjic+IrnC7uyek2A1RuHu6oAhozIbf6 HY3j5UlpFw/D01Lb9WBMw/a03bm1ytDVawSta0WwvZv7SpWmjoF7FZjwtTakwErX 17henCKIKYFYY821JN+XwiubqIJdZLlaKBtQP/O13VPv4Hl3Qc8M0p3sXo3hfqyi 8gX9z6iHi0RA/N7dfcMwJsNk7Obw2wHgICjI7zb8aqTgTIJwDmGHZEsp8f1VDzRw ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:sCLCXeqG7NjALBTxPTOguXK5HVuTkC_-t9a8uXu-7MGJhMd-qhq_yw>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrudduiedgfeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttd ertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfofgrrhhtihhnucfvhhhomhhsohhnfdcuoehmtheslhho figvnhhtrhhophihrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhivg htfhdrohhrghenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhp hidrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:sCLCXXTdI6uTIRUXfUoyMi2oJLjn5MqWMtqsS61Fe86NrJ7syrpmJg> <xmx:sCLCXZM4zeeECZqxVbbqe3QelGmAC6LhvWmnqtW8VD3Wzka9YNWlTg> <xmx:sCLCXdgkwH24LlOcnrHffggvRrbpcwbxQrLZXnPOFhPLTCRQxxfVvA> <xmx:sCLCXbv6qo7WiKI1aniHDZL_mvmx1olJNim4wM6qsOtYxz9U2BlIsA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2AF5FE00A3; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 20:32:32 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-509-ge3ec61c-fmstable-20191030v1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 12:32:12 +1100
From: "Martin Thomson" <>
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-ticketrequests
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 01:32:38 -0000

There was a lengthy discussion after the last time this was discussed.  Can I request that an editor (or a chair) summarize that discussion and the resulting actions (if any)?  I was involved in that discussion, but I don't see any changes from that.  I'm totally OK with publication as-is, but I want to make sure that nothing got dropped.

p.s., it might make sense to include some advisory text on prioritization of tickets vs. application data.  I can see a naive implementation of this seriously degrading application performance.  For instance, it doesn't take that many tickets to fill an early TCP congestion window.

p.p.s., yes, if you keep issuing last calls, I will keep finding new things.

On Wed, Nov 6, 2019, at 03:05, Sean Turner wrote:
> All,
> This is the working group last call for the "TLS Ticket Requests" draft 
> available at 
> Please review the document and send your comments to the list by 2359 
> UTC on 19 November 2019.
> Note the the GH repo for this draft can be found at:
> Thanks - J&S
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list