If the TLS stuff is on a separate port that only does TLS, what could possibly
happen before the TLS handshake?
I'm suggesting that a query/response on port 53 might happen prior to TLS.
Oh, OK. It'd help if the text mentioned that.
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@taugh.com, Taughannock
John,
> On Oct 1, 2015, at 9:21 PM, John Levine wrote:
>
> I think it's in pretty good shape but of course I have a few questions.
>
> In 3.3, it says to match queries and responses "using the ID field and
> port number". I get the ID field, but the port number? In a TCP
>
> On Oct 2, 2015, at 11:23 AM, 神明達哉 wrote:
>
> At Wed, 23 Sep 2015 10:32:05 -0400,
> Warren Kumari wrote:
>
>> Please review our documents:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dprive-dns-over-tls/
>
> I've reviewed the 00 version of
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 3:44 PM, John R Levine wrote:
>
>> Here's the text:
>>
>> 3. Any protocol interactions prior to the TLS handshake are
>> performed in the clear and can be modified by a person-in-the-
>> middle attacker. For this reason, clients MAY discard
Here's the text:
3. Any protocol interactions prior to the TLS handshake are
performed in the clear and can be modified by a person-in-the-
middle attacker. For this reason, clients MAY discard cached
information about server capabilities advertised prior to the
start
> On Oct 2, 2015, at 1:09 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
>>> I believe the abstract or introduction section should mention that
>>> TLS gives you data integrity services, which protects against
>>> on-path tampering. Right now the document talks about encryption
>>> to
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 5:05 PM, Watson Ladd wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please review our documents:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dprive-dns-over-tls/
>>
That's fine. Thanks.
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015, Wessels, Duane wrote:
On Oct 9, 2015, at 4:33 PM, John R Levine wrote:
If the TLS stuff is on a separate port that only does TLS, what could possibly
happen before the TLS handshake?
I'm suggesting that a query/response on
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 4:33 PM, John R Levine wrote:
>
>>> If the TLS stuff is on a separate port that only does TLS, what could
>>> possibly happen before the TLS handshake?
>>
>> I'm suggesting that a query/response on port 53 might happen prior to TLS.
>
> Oh, OK. It'd
Dan,
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 10:07:54 -0700
Dan Wing wrote:
> On 05-Oct-2015 03:48 pm, Ted Hardie wrote:
> > That said, the shim layer proposal seems at first glance to a
> > pretty simple extension of the multiplexing mechanics already
> > described. That
On 05-Oct-2015 03:48 pm, Ted Hardie wrote:
> That said, the shim layer proposal seems at first glance to a pretty simple
> extension of the multiplexing mechanics already described. That is, you have
> the QueryID to allow you to interleave requests; you use that in
>
11 matches
Mail list logo