On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:08:37PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 1/22/18 02:29, Michael Paquier wrote: >> However there is as well the argument that this list's contents are not >> directly used now, and based on what I saw from the MacOS SSL and GnuTLS >> patches that would not be the case after either. > > Right, there is no facility for negotiating the channel binding type, so > a boolean result should be enough.
I am not completely convinced either that we need to complicate the code to handle channel binding type negotiation. > In which case we wouldn't actually need this for GnuTLS yet. Sure. This depends mainly on how the patch for Mac's Secure Transport moves forward. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
