On Thu, Apr 23, 2020, at 5:23 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 4:58 PM Martin Thomson <[email protected]> wrote: > > What makes this case interesting is the non-machine time that might exist > > between receiving CertificateRequest and sending Certificate. > > > > In most of the exchanges, we expect there to be an answer that is > > immediately available, so that the implicit ACK works. Here we have to > > recognize that ACK might need to be sent anyway if the Certificate message > > is going to take time to source. > > > > If we don't have something already, it might pay to at least mention that > > if there are significant delays involved in preparing a response, an ACK > > SHOULD be sent rather than relying on implicit acknowledgment. > > That text is already there, thanks to Hanno.
Indeed. Given this recent addition, perhaps it's easiest to do nothing. Best, Chris (no hat) _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
