Re: [TLS] Reducing record expansion overhead allowance

I'd have thought the first 1024 was a no-brainer. As for the aead
expansion, it does seem excessive. Even if we listen to doomsayers and
acknowledge that we might need as much as 8 times the current biggest
algorithm pad from the non-aead suites, that would all allow us to halve it.
On Jul 19, 2014 2:57 PM, "Eric Rescorla" <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:

> https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/issues/55
>
> In TLS 1.2, we had the following maximum values:
>
> TLSPlaintext: 2^{14}
> TLSCompressed: 2^{14} + 1024
> TLSCiphertext: 2^{14} + 2048
>
> These overhead values allow for expansion in these transforms
> due to potential bad compression overhead or padding, etc.
>
> Wan-Teh Chang points out that we no longer have compression
> so there's no need to allow for 1024 bytes of expansion there.
>
> Minimally we should reduce the TLSCiphertext overhead to
> 2^{14} + 1024. Do people believe that we will have AEAD
> ciphers with 1024 bytes of expansion or should we reduce
> it further? I'm inclined to not re-judge that and just leave it
> at 2^{14} + 1024.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Ekr
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>
>