On 11/08/2016 06:25 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 9 November 2016 at 05:59, Brian Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> This isn't a pervasively shared goal, though. It's good to let the browsers >> police things if they want, but I think a lot of implementations would >> prefer to avoid doing work that isn't necessary for interop or security. > If you permit someone to enforce it, then that is sufficient. I don't > think that we should ever force someone to enforce these sorts of > things (as you say, sometimes strict enforcement isn't cheap or even > desirable). >
Agreed. We should probably change the text a bit, though, as right now readers can get two different readings depending on whether they go for a strict decode_error (or illegal_parameter?) since the struct doesn't match the definition, or follow the "MUST be ignored for all purposes". -Ben
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
