Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 multiple session tickets from the client?

On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 11:30 +0200, Ander Juaristi wrote: > El 2018-05-11 09:05, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos escribió: > > On Thu, 2018-05-10 at 11:46 -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > > > > > > Good to know. Does any implementation other than OpenSSL support > > > external PSKs? How do you

Re: [TLS] TLS DNSSEC chain consensus text, please speak up...

I think there’s room for two people in front of the steamroller. And I have a towel. How many votes does that get me? -Tim From: Melinda Shore [mailto:melinda.sh...@nomountain.net] Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 9:21 PM To: Tim Hollebeek Cc: Paul Wouters

Re: [TLS] TLS DNSSEC chain consensus text, please speak up...

Making things more complicated with no obvious benefit just makes things more complicated. I oppose adding two bytes for some nebulous future purpose. -Tim > -Original Message- > From: TLS [mailto:tls-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of James Cloos > Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 6:20 PM >

Re: [TLS] TLS DNSSEC chain consensus text, please speak up...

> On May 17, 2018, at 19:44, Tim Hollebeek wrote: > > Making things more complicated with no obvious benefit just makes things > more complicated. > > I oppose adding two bytes for some nebulous future purpose. The consequence of this opinion would be this:

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-03.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Transport Layer Security WG of the IETF. Title : Record Size Limit Extension for Transport Layer Security (TLS) Author : Martin Thomson

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-03.txt

Just rolling up all the changes discussed in final reviews. On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:58 AM wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Transport Layer Security WG of the IETF. >

Re: [TLS] TLS DNSSEC chain consensus text, please speak up...

I’m actually fine with that. You have to consider P_{extension implemented and used}. Different people will disagree about the value of P. -Tim From: Paul Wouters [mailto:p...@nohats.ca] Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 8:18 PM To: Tim Hollebeek Cc: James

Re: [TLS] TLS DNSSEC chain consensus text, please speak up...

And to be clear, it's not that nobody is going to implement the extension (it's already been done in an IETF hackathon and elsewhere), the work on the extension was funded by Mozilla, and there's been an outstanding request for this in Bugzilla. What's not being implemented is the proposed