James Cloos <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>> "PH" == Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email protected]> writes:
>
> PH> To me, rekey implies rebuilding the authentication relationship
> PH> between the end points. Thats a lot more work.
>
> I don't think that meshes with what most of the participants in the
> tls1.3 discussion think.
>
> My understanding of all of the rekey-instead-of-renegotiate threads
> is that everyone who wants that expects to use the same algorithm
> initially used to negotiate the symmetric key to negotiate a new one
> without any changes to which symmetric algorithm is used, or to any
> authentication which took place at the start.
>
> So it seems that there is significant interest in just changing the
> symmetric keys every so often for long-running tls sockets.

Bellovin & others did a lot of work on JFK, Just Fast Keying.
I do not now recall details, just that it looked sensible to me
at the time. There was once an Internet Draft, but I think it
has long since expired.

Several papers are linked at:
https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb/papers/

Would this solve any of the problems under discussion?

_______________________________________________
Tcpinc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

Reply via email to