Re: [TLS] draft-ietf-tls-session-hash-04 and session resumption

[Karthikeyan Bhargavan <[e-mail]>]

I like Martin’s text, and have edited it to the following:

    If the original session did not use an extended master secret but
    the new ClientHello does contain the "extended_master_secret"
    extension, the server MUST NOT continue the abbreviated handshake.
    Instead, it SHOULD perform a full handshake to negotiate a new session.

If this looks acceptable, I’ll put out a new version of the draft today.

-K.

On 15 Apr 2015, at 03:53, Martin Rex <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Karthikeyan Bhargavan wrote:
>> How about the following:
>>      If the original session did not use an extended master secret but
>>      the new ClientHello does contain the "extended_master_secret"
>>      extension, the server MUST fall back to a full handshake by
>>      sending a ServerHello that rejects session resumption and offers a
>>      new session.
> 
> Too complicated for my taste.  I do not see a need for words like
> fallback and reject, and these actually do not exist in the TLS protocol.
> 
> 
>     If the original session did not use an extended master secret but
>     the new ClientHello does contain the "extended_master_secret"
>     extension, the server MUST perform a full handshake to negotiate
>     a new session (i.e. the server MUST NOT perform an abbreviated
>     handshake aka session resume).
> 
> 
> -Martin