I don't really think this is a useful erratum against 5246; the note there
is providing an explanation for why certain values are not used (and should
not be used). But, now, and even at the time 5246 was published, 0x001e
*is* used, and there's no reason to mention it in this context. One could
First, I think this is editorial. After all these years, I’m not really sure
it’s an interop problem.
Second, if I were making this I would have placed the errata against RFC2712
where the values were assigned. It’s not really TLS1.2’s place to clear this
up.
spt
> On Jun 26, 2018, at
Hi everyone,
The draft below details an extension for Exported Authenticators (EAs) that
allows multiple EAs sent in the same TLS session to be linked into an
authentication chain using backward references.
This gives a form of joint authentication between EAs.
This means that not only does an
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5246,
"The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2".
--
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5409
--
Type: Technical
