Re: [TLS] Multiple records in record limit (was: Secdir review)
Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Mon, 26 February 2018 15:48 UTC
Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.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 69B3B126FB3 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 07:48:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 D5AIjZM2iRMg for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 07:48:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.networkradius.com (mail.networkradius.com [62.210.147.122]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F501120725 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 07:48:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.20.124] (CPEf4cc55220745-CM64777ddff610.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.248.225.186]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 44CB02022; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:48:39 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnX_RpLXVLw+hFrOQJDQkFO9Gjz9Qc2intv7ECgcowNLVg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 10:48:35 -0500
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AEEAA193-3283-4356-9410-2BA646135164@deployingradius.com>
References: <CABkgnnX_RpLXVLw+hFrOQJDQkFO9Gjz9Qc2intv7ECgcowNLVg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/IT-mZ0MpqSKbk5Kuzzo0DQPzmzY>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Multiple records in record limit (was: Secdir review)
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: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:48:49 -0000
On Feb 25, 2018, at 8:39 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote: > > Out of the secdir review (thanks again Alan!), I realized that the > draft never actually said this: > > PMTU governs the size of UDP datagrams, which limits the size of records, but > does not prevent records from being smaller. An endpoint that sends small > records is still able to send multiple records in a single UDP datagram. > > I think that I should add that explanation. > > Does anyone think that this should go further and advise against > putting multiple records in the same datagram? Yes. I don't think there's any good reason for that kind of behaviour. Alan DeKok.
- [TLS] Multiple records in record limit (was: Secd… Martin Thomson
- Re: [TLS] Multiple records in record limit (was: … Eric Rescorla
- Re: [TLS] Multiple records in record limit (was: … Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
- Re: [TLS] Multiple records in record limit (was: … Alan DeKok
- Re: [TLS] Multiple records in record limit (was: … Eric Rescorla