PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/448
Targe landing date: Wednesday
In Buenos Aires we discussed moving CertificateStatus to part of the
Certificate message. In offline conversations, it started to look like that
wasn't optimal in part because it created an asymmetry wrt Signed
Certific
Hi,
On Mon, 02 May 2016 22:43:09 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/448
Targe landing date: Wednesday
In Buenos Aires we discussed moving CertificateStatus to part of the
Certificate message. In offline conversations, it started to look like
that
wasn'
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Yngve N. Pettersen
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Mon, 02 May 2016 22:43:09 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/448
>> Targe landing date: Wednesday
>>
>> In Buenos Aires we discussed moving CertificateStatus to part of the
>> Certi
On Mon, 02 May 2016 23:11:29 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Yngve N. Pettersen
wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 02 May 2016 22:43:09 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
PR: https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/448
Targe landing date: Wednesday
In Buenos Aires we discussed mo
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Yngve N. Pettersen
wrote:
> On Mon, 02 May 2016 23:11:29 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Yngve N. Pettersen
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 02 May 2016 22:43:09 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>>
>>> PR: https://github.com/tl
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Yngve N. Pettersen
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 02 May 2016 23:11:29 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Yngve N. Pettersen
>>> wrote:
>>>
Hi,
On Mon, 02 May 2
Sorry, I'm responding to Yngve's "MUST" suggestion.
I think what would be reasonable would be:
- clients MAY send either {(v1,v2), (v2), or ()}
- servers MUST send either {(v2 ) or ()} and MUST only send (v2) if the
client sent {(v1,v2), (v2)}
That I could live with...
-Ekr
On Mon, May 2, 2016
On Mon, 02 May 2016 23:54:32 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
Sorry, I'm responding to Yngve's "MUST" suggestion.
I think what would be reasonable would be:
- clients MAY send either {(v1,v2), (v2), or ()}
- servers MUST send either {(v2 ) or ()} and MUST only send (v2) if the
client sent {(v1,v2)
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Yngve N. Pettersen
wrote:
> On Mon, 02 May 2016 23:54:32 +0200, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> Sorry, I'm responding to Yngve's "MUST" suggestion.
>>
>> I think what would be reasonable would be:
>>
>> - clients MAY send either {(v1,v2), (v2), or ()}
>> - servers MUST s
