nlikely that (1) actually has any
significant positive effect (in the TLS case, unsure about DTLS) as it
is probably easy for a passive observer to infer the content type from
the data flow.
--
Henrik Grubbström gru...@grubba.org
Roxen Internet Software AB
sson-tls-ecdhe-psk-aead works as a draft name let us know and
> one of
> us can pre-approve the draft so we can start moving this draft through the
> process.
I assume you intended to write "draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-psk-aead" here?
--
Henrik Grubbström
Version 1.0, which uses the version { 254, 255 }. The version
value of 254.255
is the 1's complement of DTLS Version 1.0.
If the suggested text had been correct, then the encoding in RFC 4347
would have been { 254, 254 } as DTLS 1.0 is based on TLS 1.1.
--
Henrik Grubbström
able is *not* to close the socket immediately, which is
> apparently not what you (or existing APIs) expect, and which is where
> the difficulty lies.
What about SO_LINGER?
--
Henrik Grubbström gru...@grubba.org
Roxen Inter
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Martin Rex wrote:
> Henrik Grubbström wrote:
>> Martin Rex wrote:
>>> The issue here is the (lack of the) TLSv1.2 signature_algorithms extension.
>>>
>>> Windows SChannel appears to treat the absence of this extension
>>
