On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Sean Turner <s...@sn3rd.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the discussion. We’re going to ask ekr to merge this one
> (obviously dealing with the additional input provided during the
> > On Sep 06, 2016, at 17:33, Sean Turner <s...@sn3rd.com> wrote:
> > All,
> > The chairs would like to get some eyes on this PR by this Friday (Sept
> 9th) so that we can draw it to close.
> > Thanks,
> > J&S
> >> On Sep 05, 2016, at 14:02, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote:
> >> PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/625
> >> Currently the TLS spec requires implementations to send alerts under
> >> fatal conditions. However, many stacks actually don't send alerts but
> >> just terminate the connection. Several people have argued that we
> should relax
> >> the requirement.
> >> At the September 2015 interim there was consensus to instead encourage
> >> sending alerts and require that if you send an alert, you send a
> specific one.
> >> I've finally gotten around to producing a PR that does this (link
> above). This
> >> PR:
> >> - Harmonizes all the language around alert sending (though perhaps I
> >> a couple of places)
> >> - Tries to make which alerts to send clearer in the alert descriptions
> to avoid
> >> having to specify individually how to handle every decision.
> >> - Relaxes the requirement as listed above.
> >> Note that these are to some extent orthogonal changes; even if we
> decide to
> >> continue mandating sending alerts, that should be listed in one
> location not
> >> scattered around the spec.
> >> I know that there wasn't universal consensus on relaxing the
> requirement to
> >> send, so I'll await WG discussion and the chairs decision on how to
> handle this PR.
> >> -Ekr
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> TLS mailing list
> >> TLS@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
> TLS mailing list
TLS mailing list