On 29 March 2016 at 22:32, Stephen Farrell <[email protected]> wrote:
> In an offlist exchange with Martin, I suggested allowing
> finer granularity than 1s, e.g. 1ms.

I think that this is reasonable.  This might allow for tighter
tolerance for drift, which means less replay opportunity.


On 30 March 2016 at 04:45, Kyle Nekritz <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think this will better account for the round trip delay if the elapsed_time 
> is defined on the client as the time since the request for the session ticket 
> (in other words, the time since the client hello was sent).

Unfortunately, there is no client message that solicits the
NewSessionTicket.  The message can be sent spontaneously by a server
at any time.


On 30 March 2016 at 05:49, Ilari Liusvaara <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is this intended to be somehow compatible with off-band configurations?

If an out of band configuration is used, then we would need a rule for
establishing the time that elapsed_time starts from and new rules
about tolerances.  This isn't going to be compatible straight off.


On 30 March 2016 at 06:53, Colm MacCárthaigh <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's likely I'm misunderstanding, but I'll ask to clear it up. Does this
> proposal imply that a 0RTT section can only be sent within a very tight time
> limit of when the server provided a resumption ticket/configuration?

No.  If we accept Stephen's suggestion and go to milliseconds (I will
do that), then the maximum age of a ticket is just over 7 weeks.  Much
longer than the time we allow a resumption ticket to live.

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

Reply via email to