On 17/07/2019, 17:42, "Thomas Fossati" wrote:
> My suggestion is we move that section back and point to RRC for the
> "final" solution. This doesn't give complete internal coherency to
> conn-id -- which is indeed suboptimal -- but the recommendation to
> provide peer address update call-backs pr
On 17/07/2019, 16:33, "TLS on behalf of Martin Thomson" wrote:
> I'm really concerned about shipping a protocol that enables the sorts
> of attacks that connection IDs enable. I think that we should discuss
> that issue when we meet. I know that Hannes' new draft is an attempt
> to tackle this i
These changes look fine. Mostly.
I'm really concerned about shipping a protocol that enables the sorts of
attacks that connection IDs enable. I think that we should discuss that issue
when we meet. I know that Hannes' new draft is an attempt to tackle this
issue, but that's a long way from b
Kraus
Engineering Cloud Services 4 Bosch IoT Hub (INST/ECS4)
Von: TLS Im Auftrag von Joseph Salowey
Gesendet: Montag, 15. Juli 2019 19:19
An:
Betreff: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-06
This the working group last call for draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-06. The
diff
This the working group last call for draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-06.
The diff between the version that was last called (-03) and the current
version can be found here:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-06.txt&url1=draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-03
Pleas
