Thank you for the detailed review! I believe I have addressed your
feedback in a draft that I will upload shortly, but have a few
comments (inline).
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021, at 20:20, Dale Worley via Datatracker wrote:
> Given that this is the introduction and RFC 5929 is referenced without
> its tit
"Sam Whited" writes:
>> The appearance of this paragraph in this section suggests (but does
>> not assert) that in TLS 1.3, the cipher negotiation always results in
>> unique master secrets. Indeed, it would be extremely convenient if
>> (standard-conformant) use of TLS 1.3 always did so, and if
