On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 12:04:51PM +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> Well, TLS 1.3 doesn't have a PRF, but instead explicitly uses HKDF.
>
> With that said, I don't really understand the structure of your draft:
> Instead of referencing the PRF and session_hash directly, why not instead
> use RFC 5
Eric Rescorla writes:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
>> > > The introduction says:
>> > >
>> > >There exists a TLS extension [I-D.ietf-tls-session-hash] that
>> > > modify TLS so that the definition of 'tls-unique' [RFC5929] has the
>> > > intended properties. If
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > > The introduction says:
> > >
> > >There exists a TLS extension [I-D.ietf-tls-session-hash] that
> > > modify TLS so that the definition of 'tls-unique' [RFC5929] has the
> > > intended properties. If widely implemented and deployed
> > The introduction says:
> >
> >There exists a TLS extension [I-D.ietf-tls-session-hash] that
> > modify TLS so that the definition of 'tls-unique' [RFC5929] has the
> > intended properties. If widely implemented and deployed, the
> > channel binding type in this document would not offer any
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Simon Josefsson
wrote:
> Eric Rescorla writes:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Simon Josefsson
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The notes from the interim meeting mentions 'tls-unique' and points to
> >> issue #228 on github. I want to get your attention on the draft
Eric Rescorla writes:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Simon Josefsson
> wrote:
>
>> The notes from the interim meeting mentions 'tls-unique' and points to
>> issue #228 on github. I want to get your attention on the draft below.
>> Doesn't it do what you are looking for? There is a little i
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Simon Josefsson
wrote:
> The notes from the interim meeting mentions 'tls-unique' and points to
> issue #228 on github. I want to get your attention on the draft below.
> Doesn't it do what you are looking for? There is a little in the way of
> a problem stateme