Re: [TLS] Verify data in the RI extension?

[Martin Rex <[e-mail]>]

[e-mail] wrote:
> 
> For simplicity, the current draft is already very simple, and IMHO
> it's not clear that continuing to tweak it has a positive return
> on investment, considering it delays the publication. 

We should _not_ rush it out.

The message that I'm getting from people doing maintenance of
old installed base is that it is not easy for them to make
an assessment about TLS extension RI.  The spec is from a high
level view.  For implementations that don't support TLS extensions,
you can only find out and what it means in terms of code changes
when you try to implement it--not from that draft.


When I (re)wrote my I-D, I tried to describe all the necessary
code changes in order to implement it.  Well, OK, it's a little more
than that, more like a "nanny" spec.


It should _not_ be a question how beautiful the solution is and how well it
fits into new implementations, but primarily, that it fits equally
well even the oldest implementations around, and that it is easy
for them to implement, otherwise we are not going to see the
widespread adoption that we need.


-Martin