Re: [TLS] Draft 18 review : 0-RTT

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Wed, 23 November 2016 00:28 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161122190720.GE19978@neoplankton.picty.org>
References: <20161122190720.GE19978@neoplankton.picty.org>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 11:28:15 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUnQ_sc_wdzynYDvWgag-tbU8Ut+Bs8gdrke5E-Ab_HvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Olivier Levillain <olivier.levillain@ssi.gouv.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/L2oSB6enqCSfFu7b5vVxO8dgo5Y>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Draft 18 review : 0-RTT
Precedence: list

On 23 November 2016 at 06:07, Olivier Levillain
<olivier.levillain@ssi.gouv.fr> wrote:
>
> In 4.2.8 (P.47), the server receiving early_data "can behave in one of
> two ways"... followed by three cases.  Beside the typo, the first case
> could be phrased differently.  Actually, it reads
>
>    -  Ignore the extension and return no response.  This indicates that
>       the server has ignored any early data and an ordinary 1-RTT
>       handshake is required.
>
> Since an ordinary 1-RTT handshake will require the server to actually
> send a response (the ServerHello), it might be better to put it this
> way:
>
>    -  Ignore the extension and return a standard 1-RTT ServerHello.
>       This indicates that the server has ignored any early data and
>       an ordinary 1-RTT handshake is required.

Here's a PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/773

I've gone a little bit further than what Olivier suggests and pointed
out in each of these that the server is required to ignore early data.

[TLS] Draft 18 review : 0-RTT Olivier Levillain
Re: [TLS] Draft 18 review : 0-RTT Martin Thomson
Re: [TLS] Draft 18 review : 0-RTT Olivier Levillain