[TLS]Re: Adoption Call for draft-davidben-tls-key-share-prediction

[Joseph Salowey <[e-mail]>]

There is consensus to adopt this draft as a working group item.  I'll work
with the authors to migrate to the official repository and submit an
updated draft.

On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 11:23 AM Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:

> These are all fair points, and it's possible we don't need to do anything
> with the transcript.
>
> I don't think we need to resolve this before adoption, I just wanted to
> make sure that I said something now to make sure people weren't surprised
> later.
>
> -Ekr
>
>
> On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 6:46 AM David Benjamin <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> Off the cuff, folding it into the transcript sounds tricky, since
>> existing TLS servers won't know to do it, and, as with any other DNS hints,
>> we need to accommodate the DNS being out of sync with the server. It'll
>> also be more difficult to deploy due to needing changes in the TLS stack
>> and generally require much, much tighter coordination between DNS and TLS.
>> I'd like for that coordination to be more viable (see my comments on the
>> .well-known draft), but I don't think we're there yet.
>>
>> But I'm certainly open to continue discussing it and this problem space!
>> The original version of the draft actually tried a lot harder to handle the
>> downgrade story. Rather than mess with the transcript, it defined away all
>> the negotiation algorithms where this would be a problem and keyed the
>> NamedGroup codepoints to know when you could be guaranteed of the narrower
>> server behavior.
>>
>> My read of the feedback was that people thought this was an unnecessary
>> complication and that servers doing a key-share-first selection were doing
>> so intentionally because they believed the options roughly equivalent. So I
>> took all that out and replaced it with text to that effect.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 21, 2024, 08:54 Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that it's attractive to be able to hint in the HTTPS RR, but I'm
>>> less sure about addressing the basic insecurity of the DNS channel with the
>>> approach this draft takes. I don't have a complete thought here, but what
>>> if we were to somehow fold the hint into the handshake transcript? I
>>> suppose we can sort this out post-adoption, but I'd like the question to be
>>> on the table.
>>>
>>> -Ekr
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 3:05 PM Joseph Salowey <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is a working group call for adoption
>>>> for draft-davidben-tls-key-share-prediction.  This document was presented
>>>> at IET 118 and has undergone some revision based on feedback since then.
>>>> The current draft is available here:
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davidben-tls-key-share-prediction/.
>>>> Please read the document and indicate if and why you support or do not
>>>> support adoption as a TLS working group item. If you support adoption
>>>> please, state if you will help review and contribute text to the document.
>>>> Please respond to this call by May 20, 2024.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Joe, Deidre, and Sean
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> TLS mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> TLS mailing list -- [e-mail]
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>>>
>>