Hi Joe,
On 10/04/2013 05:58 PM, Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) wrote:
>
Apologies for the glacial response.
Your suggestion for point 3 looks fine. Point 1 is already
a comment.
But point 2 needs a bit more discussion.
The concern is that you're doing a layering violation and we know
that the laye
I'd like to hear from the working group on this.
I think Stephen is raising a fair point that trying to use the TLS PRF in this
way creates a very tight binding between a TLS implementation and a TEAP
implementation that may make implementations difficult depending upon the
interfaces provide
