Yes, I will provide a PR.
Jens
Von: Eric Rescorla [mailto:e...@rtfm.com]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 18. Dezember 2016 01:04
An: Benjamin Kaduk
Cc: Guballa Jens (ETAS-PSC/ECS) ;
Betreff: Re: [TLS] Comments to draft tls13-18
I've merged all the outstanding editorial PR. Jens, would you li
I've merged all the outstanding editorial PR. Jens, would you like to
propose changes via a PR?
-Ekr
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On 12/15/2016 07:32 AM, Guballa Jens (ETAS-PSC/ECS) wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I had a closer look at the TLS1.3-18-draft, and I would li
On 12/15/2016 07:32 AM, Guballa Jens (ETAS-PSC/ECS) wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I had a closer look at the TLS1.3-18-draft, and I would like to provide some
> comments.
>
> My overall impression is that too less attention has been put on a clear and
> precise terminology.
>
Yes, that has not been a foc
> > - Page 108 (appendix C.4): "If an implementation negotiates use of TLS
> 1.2, then negotiation of
> > cipher suites also supported by TLS 1.3 SHOULD be preferred, if
> > available."
> > TLS cipher suites for TLS1.3 and TLS1.2 are disjunctive, in my
> understanding. Therefore I think this
Hi,
> - Page 110 (appendix D.1): I am not quite sure if the term "session key"
> is needed at all. IMO, it is just a synonym for "master secret".
> My proposal is to replace "session key" by "master key" throughout the
> complete document.
[JG] Sorry, "master key" is wrong. I meant s/session ke
On Thursday, December 15, 2016 08:32:32 am Guballa Jens (ETAS-PSC/ECS) wrote:
> - Page 108 (appendix C.4): "If an implementation negotiates use of TLS 1.2,
> then negotiation of
> cipher suites also supported by TLS 1.3 SHOULD be preferred, if
> available."
> TLS cipher suites for TLS1.
