Re: [TLS] SCSV vs RI when both specified. Was: Updated draft

Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com> Sun, 20 December 2009 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A0DE3A688F for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:40:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.193
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.193 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wx9MOwK1m3nE for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:40:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpde01.sap-ag.de (smtpde01.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.171]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA5533A67DF for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:40:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sap.corp by smtpde01.sap-ag.de (26) with ESMTP id nBKMdmF6017899 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:39:48 +0100 (MET)
From: Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com>
Message-Id: <200912202239.nBKMdlg8004444@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
To: s@pahtak.org (Steve Checkoway)
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:39:47 +0100 (MET)
In-Reply-To: <4F7AF248-A0E4-4EBE-82BB-F243F35FD9C2@pahtak.org> from "Steve Checkoway" at Dec 20, 9 07:12:28 am
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Scanner: Virus Scanner virwal05
X-SAP: out
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] SCSV vs RI when both specified. Was: Updated draft
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
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/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:40:08 -0000

Steve Checkoway wrote:
> 
> My point was merely that publication and subsequent implementation of  
> the fix is more important than worrying about the specifics of what  
> happens when two signals are used (as long as it is clearly specified,  
> of course). Others may feel differently.

http://digbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/volltexte/documents/1827

-Martin