Re: [TLS] MTI extensions?

SNI might be plausible as a MUST implement but there are plenty of cases
where it's not sensible to be MUST send, as in where there is no server
hostname. E.g., WebRTC.

-Ekr

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Dave Garrett <davemgarrett@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 13 March 2015 at 23:12, Dave Garrett <davemgarrett@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In particular, SNI & ALPN should ideally be available everywhere.
>
> On Sunday, March 15, 2015 02:08:23 pm Martin Thomson wrote:
> > I don't see any point in making ALPN mandatory.  If you need it, you
> > need it; if you don't, that's all there is to say.
>
> On Sunday, March 15, 2015 02:21:20 pm Salz, Rich wrote:
> > Agree with mt: SNI yes, ALPN not mandatory.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> It might still be worth mentioning in the spec, but with no requirements
> placed on it.
>
>
> Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>