Hello,
Does anyone have any views on the below?
Thanks
Matt
On 30/09/15 11:06, Matt Caswell wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I have a question on how to interpret RFC 5246 with regards to the
> interleaving of app data and handshake records.
>
> RFC 5246 (and RFC 4346 before it) contains these words:
>
>
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:12:45AM +0100, Matt Caswell wrote:
>
> On 30/09/15 11:06, Matt Caswell wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > I have a question on how to interpret RFC 5246 with regards to the
> > interleaving of app data and handshake records.
>
> Hello,
>
> Does anyone have any views on the below?
On 10/12/2015 10:21 PM, Rick van Rein wrote:
> Hello Benjamin,
>
>> This would seem to require an application protocol doing some Kerberos
>> exchanges up front to establish the Kerberos session key before pivoting
>> into TLS-PSK in a STARTLS-esque fashion. If that's what the application
>> protoc
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On 10/11/2015 08:46 AM, Watson Ladd wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Ilari Liusvaara
>> wrote:
>>> Some quick comments:
>>> - The signed DH share does not look to be bound to anything (crypto
>>> parameters negotiation, randoms,
