Re: [TLS] ct_compliant cached info field

Thanks EKR. Done, in https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-rfcs/pull/307 On 22/02/2019 14:51, Eric Rescorla wrote: > That works for me > > -Ekr > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 6:41 AM Rob Stradling > wrote: > > EKR, Martin, > > Hi, and sorry for t

Re: [TLS] ct_compliant cached info field

That works for me -Ekr On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 6:41 AM Rob Stradling wrote: > EKR, Martin, > > Hi, and sorry for the long delay in replying. > > This originated in [1] and was added to 6962-bis in [2]. The motivation > was to provide a mechanism to permit a TLS server to avoid sending CT > ar

Re: [TLS] ct_compliant cached info field

EKR, Martin, Hi, and sorry for the long delay in replying. This originated in [1] and was added to 6962-bis in [2]. The motivation was to provide a mechanism to permit a TLS server to avoid sending CT artifacts (SCTs, STHs, inclusion proofs) that it knows the TLS client already has or doesn't

Re: [TLS] ct_compliant cached info field

+ trans On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 10:06 PM Martin Thomson wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2018, at 04:58, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > Please take a look at > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-30#section-6.5 > > At a minimum, this would seem to update cached_info. > > There's not a

Re: [TLS] ct_compliant cached info field

On Fri, Dec 28, 2018, at 04:58, Eric Rescorla wrote: > Please take a look at > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-30#section-6.5 At a minimum, this would seem to update cached_info. There's not a lot of meat on this text. It seems to be saying that if you are providing t

[TLS] ct_compliant cached info field

Hi folks Please take a look at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis-30#section-6.5 which defines a new "ct_compliant" cached info extension. This sort of overloads the cached info mechanism (one might say "abuses"), so needs review by the TLS WG. -Ekr _