On Thu, Sep 19, 2019, at 6:41 AM, Christopher Wood wrote: > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, at 4:31 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019, at 01:41, Christopher Wood wrote: > > > Ah, so, I think this is where the miscommunication is happening! The > > > target KDFs I've been envisioning are not protocol specific. > > > > As HKDF and the TLS 1.2 PRF are not the same function, wouldn't it be > > better to have separate identifiers? Sure, we could rely on the > > `protocol` field to diversify the output, but I think that we should be > > applying the same principle throughout, namely that the one key is only > > used with the one KDF instantiation. > > Agreed on the principle, especially if future versions of TLS define > new KDFs and we want to avoid using the same imported key across both. > > I'll make that change after #18 > (https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-importer/pull/18) > lands, at which point we should be able to close issues #15 and #16.
OK, #18, modified to take this discussion into account, has been merged. Thanks to everyone who commented here and on GitHub! Best, Chris _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
