> On 3 Apr 2016, at 8:44 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
>
> On 3 April 2016 at 18:18, Peter Gutmann wrote:
>> I think the reason why there's no rationale is because there's no rational
>> explanation for lumping TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA256 in with the likes
>> of TLS_RSA_EXPORT_WITH_RC4_40_M
On 3 April 2016 at 18:18, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> I think the reason why there's no rationale is because there's no rational
> explanation for lumping TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA256 in with the likes
> of TLS_RSA_EXPORT_WITH_RC4_40_MD5.
You evidently believe that a decision to move to AEAD on
Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos writes:
>I liked the idea of an LTS profile for TLS 1.2, however I just realized that
>RFC7540 [0] blacklists (with no rationale) 3 out of the 4 LTS ciphersuites
>and I'm wondering how practically useful will be that profile.
I chose the two sets of algorithms that were s
On Friday, April 01, 2016 03:54:51 am Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 12:36 +, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> > After a number of, uh, gentle reminders from people who have been
> > waiting for
> > this, I've finally got around to posting the TLS-LTS draft I
> > mentioned a while
On Wed, 2016-03-16 at 12:36 +, Peter Gutmann wrote:
> After a number of, uh, gentle reminders from people who have been
> waiting for
> this, I've finally got around to posting the TLS-LTS draft I
> mentioned a while
> back. It's now available as:
>
> > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-gutmann-tl
