On 13/03/2021 18:03, Thomas Fossati wrote:
hi Tom,
On 13/03/2021, 11:54, "tom petch" wrote:
Is your suggestion to remove the parenthetical? I.e.:
OLD
A zero-length value indicates that the server will send with the
client's CID but does not wish the client to in
On 12/03/2021 18:32, Thomas Fossati wrote:
Hi Tom, all,
On 12/03/2021, 17:29, "tom petch" wrote:
On 12/03/2021 16:18, Achim Kraus wrote:
Hi Tom, Hannes, Thomas,
"A zero-length value indicates that the server will send with the
client's CID but does not wish the client
and
wanted to know which form of header and MAC was appropriate but my
understanding of the later paragraphs became that a zero length CID can
only appear in Hello; but I do think that this needs fixing.
I did track the WG discussion last October and did not see anything very
clear then.
uested to allocate an entry to the existing "TLS
"ExtensionType Values" registry, defined in [RFC5246], and
renamed by RFC8447
An extra column is added but I cannot see what value should be placed in
that column for existing entries.
"The tls12_cid ContentType is only a
On 15/12/2020 12:51, tom petch wrote:
On 14/12/2020 16:36, tom petch wrote:
On 14/12/2020 14:53, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 10/11/2020 11:33, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 10/11/2020 11:30, tom petch wrote:
Perhaps a second look at the algorithm
to work out why these got missed to get a fix on
On 14/12/2020 16:36, tom petch wrote:
On 14/12/2020 14:53, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi Tom,
On 10/11/2020 11:33, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 10/11/2020 11:30, tom petch wrote:
Perhaps a second look at the algorithm
to work out why these got missed to get a fix on how many more there
may be
On 14/12/2020 14:53, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hi Tom,
On 10/11/2020 11:33, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 10/11/2020 11:30, tom petch wrote:
Perhaps a second look at the algorithm
to work out why these got missed to get a fix on how many more there may be.
Sure, that's reasonable. (Mig
security breaches.
Tom Petch
Thanks,
Rob
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 7:48 PM Ackermann, Michael
wrote:
Deborah
Thanks so much for your informative and positive message.
I have not followed the OPs area too much, but will make an effort to do
so now. Any specific drafts you might suggest, I w
On 10/11/2020 11:18, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Hiya,
On 10/11/2020 10:21, tom petch wrote:
I am confused about the treatment here of DTLS.
The Abstract seems clear about the proposed action for TLS but then
the second paragraph has
" This document also deprecates Datagram TLS (DTLS) versio
ormatively references
DTLS 1.0 (and which is part of a STD - not sure what that does to the
Standard)
And, in several places
/supercede/supersede/
Tom Petch
On 09/11/2020 22:26, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Transport Layer Security WG (tls) to
consider the followin
y vulnerable to
attack and this document deprecates their use in TLS 1.2 digital
signatures.'
And
/This draft/This document/
Tom Petch
On 14/10/2020 19:40, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from the Transport Layer Security WG (tls) to
consider the following document: -
Kathleen
I have some thoughts below on RFC5953 and RFC6353 which I cannot find in
deprecate but thought that I would.
Tom Petch
From: TLS on behalf of tom petch
Sent: 13 August 2020 12:33
To: Benjamin Kaduk
Cc: TLS Chairs; TLS@ietf.org
Subject: Re
From: Benjamin Kaduk
Sent: 11 August 2020 18:06
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 10:30:39AM +, tom petch wrote:
> From: TLS on behalf of Christopher Wood
>
> Sent: 04 August 2020 19:16
>
> The official minutes are now up:
>
>
> https://urldefense.proof
, related to oldversions-deprecate but that is a guess from reading
between the lines and that topic is a live one for me so I would appreciate
clarity.
Tom Petch
Best,
Chris, on behalf of the chairs
On Tue, Jul 28, 2020, at 9:29 AM, Christopher Wood wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Draf
From: Jen Linkova
Sent: 28 July 2020 23:14
To: tom petch
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 2:07 AM tom petch wrote:
>> This email starts the WG Last Call for draft-ietf-opsec-ns-impact ,
>> Impact of TLS 1.3 to Operational Network Security Practices,
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/d
while before I am ready with more comments on that
other I-D.
Tom Petch
This draft provides guidelines for TLS proxy implementations; given current
activities using TLS with proxying I believe this document is useful for the
community and implementors. I support its adoption.
Warm regards
thoughts
together.
Tom Petch
Thanks!
--
SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry on behalf of the OpSec Chairs.
___
OPSEC mailing list
op...@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
___
TLS mailing list
TLS
17 matches
Mail list logo
