+1
Subodh
From: TLS [tls-boun...@ietf.org] on behalf of David Benjamin
[david...@chromium.org]
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2016 11:49 AM
To: Salz, Rich; Eric Rescorla; tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Issue 472: Remove non-closure warning alerts
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 a
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 7:37 AM Salz, Rich wrote:
> > If people are in favor of this, I will prepare a PR.
>
> +1
>
+1
David
___
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 04:21:30PM +0200, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> based on the feedback from Ilari this week I have drafted initial text
> that talks about rekeying and the use of the epoch value.
One maybe workable scheme that occurs to me is: Outside special
epoches reserved for
> If people are in favor of this, I will prepare a PR.
+1
___
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
In general, TLS stacks handle warning alerts badly aside from the defined
alerts
that are explicitly non-fatal ("close_notify", etc.). Many just close the
connection
so it's not safe to send one.
I would suggest that we instead adopt the following semantic:
- All alerts mean connection close.
- F
