Hi Folks,
I have just published draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis-05, with
the following changes:
* Update the extension table (Issue 1241)
* Clarify user_canceled (Issue 1208)
* Clarify 0-RTT cache side channels (Issue 1225)
* Require that message reinjection be done with the current hash.
Potentially a clarification and potentially a wire format
change depending on previous interpretation (Issue 1227)
I landed a few current PRs without review. If people think I handled
these incorrectly or mis-merged, please flag that.
This includes most of the outstanding issues and PRs.
The following remain:
PRS
1275 -- Clarifying unsolicited extensions
[Waiting for review from Kaduk]
1270 -- The impact of excessive key updates
[Working on text with MT]
1269 -- A new error for invalid tickets
[see below]
1231 -- Update in light of RFC 8773
[I missed this, but will get to it on my next pass]
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
1223, 1224 -- Revising the HRR rules
1278 -- There are no entries in the table for which TLS 1.3
messages token binding goes in.
As preview of our discussion in London.
I believe I can handle 1275, 1270, and 1231 at the editorial
level.
I believe we should not land 1269. As noted in the issue there is
already an unknown_psk_identity, which captures this. I propose to
close this issue.
We need to agree on what appears in the table for token binding.
I think this is mechanical. MT? DavidBen? Andrei?
This leaves us with 1223 and 1224. I agree that the HRR semantics
are a little confusing, but we don't seem to be making much
progress on revising them and given that 8446 is already
out, I think we should just publish this revision and then
if people get energy to address this issue we can do so later.
-Ekr
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
