Re: [TLS] Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' toProposedStandard

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> writes:

> I can see many situations where the information in this is not
> sensitive.  In fact, in the primary use case, the use mapping
> information is not sensitive.  An enterprise PKI is used in this
> situation, and the TLS extension is used to map the subject name in
> the certificate to the host account name.

But then we're left with the performance rationale that the user has
some semi-infinite number of mappings that makes it impossible to send
all of them and too hard to figure out which one. In light of the fact
that in the original -01 proposal there wasn't even any negotiation
for which type of UME data should be sent, is there any evidence that
this is going to be an important/common case?

-Ekr

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls