IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] consensus call: draft-ietf-tls-ticketrequests

Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> Fri, 06 March 2020 01:37 UTC

Return-Path: <mt@lowentropy.net>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 975F23A10AF for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 17:37:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=tP6aw2t1; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=MEywwwMo
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NAhqHhH6EOmm for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 17:37:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E8D13A1075 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 17:37:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACA956E1; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 20:37:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 05 Mar 2020 20:37:45 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :cc:subject:content-type; s=fm1; bh=9EN1Us7E4vHJIcq3grPKwb24/otc 7E/PRw+yjnBtXsg=; b=tP6aw2t1Hs9/sFfFgQQHpkDr2jqvtnA/lrNVdqA2PuzF Kc5ft1yjzbktCxjPbxpyqBM3Q7EG6jmy2lZCQFFQx2OARjyB40LeJyseSii6EUf6 4L5bT5Ik18QHO7alvfXhW8lXzh6zjUy69qK1T52jZjgGmM9Y/Iqxb4V188AiJz+R WMIQ4eg5/p9wgV6gCf52ZJi3tK3wqyvY2dgtka1zmynvZcV4YXLS7kLRDa37OniQ fowfqNWLzXVJMPTRAOmbHBPGQm94zLMzXpQ+LujVqtqPSVVe6qFNXDL78QXvn8Rg LSS0KCO4KHwfbatGdXflsBDx6uUgmhtj5alzXHaKQw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=9EN1Us 7E4vHJIcq3grPKwb24/otc7E/PRw+yjnBtXsg=; b=MEywwwMojYFyLE2rIU+SFA t70M743y5TyPiX61J5fNLDvD2rVdg32llsyfSM54NpV5xQ8mEcuPOAFuY8XGNM4X UjVL3mYQTxdrSXdN62OLAVGr+V5n5NI9aFRSgxP+FuNtbEuB/3fDWp3bOG6T3+Cn PvVCaGZriBHBy6FDadR6WzQcz27l5IYp0NEmX6PWuh6tGzOaM+f9et+mpAf3Tgvy kHSCXl9sm3T9g6s37vLHin8efCLhSkEkPvsfEXwIAefsyC31/aqZJI5bgzsMVRcw OetJMIk8zzE3PpmIEAgjAwAke1UYQqAwqyUPeq0Ah5BAHf3mKW0p38LG7hL3eSzg ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:aKlhXjk9Dwa-18CJYNvuy23tRLB05WcFr6uLAoh3Y72ceIYHXatl5A>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrudduuddgfeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdforghr thhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuve hluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:aKlhXp39qJ7GduL1Y9IPxReSazxcZjN701WLgFpDyDmoWHHwO2JL2Q> <xmx:aKlhXlQMjzAYq0W3mmvlgfHoOuc5p41-fifSPKBq08oNjJ_RQpAJ8A> <xmx:aKlhXqRCM6pjNBw8VPqWQdYdXN04X6MY6p5HyTPyKtffwV_Hk4ehyw> <xmx:aalhXsL5LxNuXsga2B0VIsXn0AffSvQdlVcQNIw1Emo6tRLB2eQuFQ>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id CC31DE00C8; Thu, 5 Mar 2020 20:37:44 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.7-991-g5a577d3-fmstable-20200305v3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <8238f7de-3295-4c52-a506-9404028f6e38@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200306012812.GV3439@akamai.com>
References: <4E07012F-AB53-4727-A309-D8A15222A433@sn3rd.com> <0E7E2E43-CC46-488E-981E-BF8417821D85@sn3rd.com> <499f4c6f-fa95-44ea-8c44-c985e140c4e0@www.fastmail.com> <20200306012812.GV3439@akamai.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 12:37:26 +1100
From: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <bkaduk@akamai.com>
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/aMpAEZUxpzwCYTRpQPd1Z0P-zgA>
Subject: Re: [TLS] consensus call: draft-ietf-tls-ticketrequests
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 01:37:54 -0000

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020, at 12:28, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> Other than this bit about giving resumption_count of zero additional
> semantics than "I am requesting zero tickets if resumption succeeds", I
> actually think this proposal is quite good.  The comments I left on PR
> 18 are effectively advocating for something like this.

Yeah, I think that's perfect.  We don't have to get into implications or inferences.

> For an example of mechanism without policy, if a client successfully
> resumes and asks for zero tickets in the resumption case, but the server
> issues a ticket anyway, we can pretty reliably conclude that the
> original ticket is no longer valid for resumption.

I wouldn't make any inferences there either :)  But it seems like something that could happen.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status