Re: [TLS] Followup on Update

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I'd like to get a sense of the WG on whether they want to pursue the Update
> mechanism [0].
>
> There are several possibilities here, including:
>
> - Just do basic Update
> - Move session ticket establishment to Update
> - Mode client authentication to Update
>
> My sense from the discussion in HNL was that people were generally
> positive on basic Update and unsure on the other two. If that's right,
> I'll buff up PR#94 for merge into the spec (pending chair approval).

Between update and the changes to the state machine in the Server and
Client Hellos, the complexity of a combined TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3
implementation will be considerable. I appreciate the issues with
removing renegotiation wholesale, but this seems to introduce a lot of
complexity for the usecases of long-lasting connections and TLS layer
client authentication, and I don't think we've solved all the issues
with the latter.

That said, basic auth doesn't seem too bad, and I think my client
authentication question has a lot more to do with semantics and how
those are exposed then with the mechanism in the PR.

Sincerely,
Watson Ladd

>
> Thanks,
> -Ekr
>
>
> [0] See https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/94 for a WIP
> version of the basic mechanism.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>

-- 
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
Temporary Safety deserve neither  Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin