Re: [TLS] Text for draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis

[Michael D'Errico <[e-mail]>]

Joe - the new text looks good to me.

Mike



Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) wrote:
> Good suggestion, thanks for the text, here is the text reworked:
> 
> "When the server is deciding whether or not to accept a request to
> resume
>  a session, the contents of a server_name extension may be used in 
>  the lookup of the session in the session cache.  The client SHOULD 
>  include the same server_name extension in session resumption 
>  request as it did in the full handshake that established the
>  session.  If the server_name extension contains a different name, 
>  the server MUST NOT accept the request to resume the session. 
>  Instead, it proceeds with a full handshake to establish a new 
>  Session.  The client MAY omit the extension, in which case, if 
>  the server chooses to resume the session, it must use the server 
>  name cached from the original full handshake. When resuming a 
>  session, the server MUST NOT include a server_name extension in
>  the server hello."
> 
> Changes to section 1.1
> 
> "Note also that all the extensions defined in this document are
>  relevant only when a session is initiated.  When a client includes
>  one or more of the defined extension types in an extended client
>  hello while requesting session resumption:
> 
> 	-  The server name indication extension MAY be used by the 
>          server when deciding whether or not to resume a session 
>          as described in section 3.
> 
>       -  If the resumption request is denied, the use of the extensions
>          is negotiated as normal.
> 
>       -  If, on the other hand, the older session is resumed, then the
>          server MUST ignore the extensions and send a server hello
>          containing none of the extension types.  In this case, the
>          functionality of these extensions negotiated during the
>          original session initiation is applied to the resumed session."
>