Le 2016-11-15 15:35, Ilari Liusvaara a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 05:02:24PM +0900, Yoav Nir wrote:
I think the performance enhancement (in terms of handshakes per
second)
that you get by reusing ephemeral keys is so great, that we have to
assume people will do it. You don’t have to keep
Le 2016-11-17 14:58, Antoine Delignat-Lavaud a écrit :
Le 2016-11-15 15:35, Ilari Liusvaara a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 05:02:24PM +0900, Yoav Nir wrote:
I think the performance enhancement (in terms of handshakes per
second)
that you get by reusing ephemeral keys is so great, that we ha
Hi Achim,
On 16/11/2016 10:21, "TLS on behalf of Kraus Achim (INST/ESY1)"
wrote:
>I'm still wondering, why the "clashing" calculations (section 4) are only
>based on the number of clients and not also on the length of the hash
>chain.
I guess you are right. The left column should say "sessions
I’ve uploaded the slides for Friday as well as a revised WG Chair Slide deck
(version 5), which reflects the revised agenda based on presentations that got
moved to Wednesday.
spt
> On Nov 15, 2016, at 08:20, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> Please note that I’ve been uploading the presentations as I’v
New version uploaded v6 is now the current version.
spt
> On Nov 18, 2016, at 08:13, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> I’ve uploaded the slides for Friday as well as a revised WG Chair Slide deck
> (version 5), which reflects the revised agenda based on presentations that
> got moved to Wednesday.
>
>
This is the working group last call for the "ECDHE_PSK with AES-GCM and AES-CCM
CSs for TLS" draft available at
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-ecdhe-psk-aead/. Please review
the document and send your comments to the list by 9 December 2016.
Thanks,
J&S
___
At IETF 97, the chairs lead a discussion to resolve whether the WG should
rebrand TLS1.3 to something else. Slides can be found @
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-tls-rebranding-aka-pr612-01.pdf.
The consensus in the room was to leave it as is, i.e., TLS1.3, and to not
rebr
Bleh. Can’t we get AOL to release the SSL trademark so that we can call it
SSLv4?
I hummed for TLS 4, so I’ll stay consistent: TLS 4.
Yoav
> On 18 Nov 2016, at 11:12, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> At IETF 97, the chairs lead a discussion to resolve whether the WG should
> rebrand TLS1.3 to somethi
I also prefer TLS 4 but am fine with TLS 1.3
- Erik
On Nov 17, 2016 9:41 PM, "Yoav Nir" wrote:
> Bleh. Can’t we get AOL to release the SSL trademark so that we can call it
> SSLv4?
>
> I hummed for TLS 4, so I’ll stay consistent: TLS 4.
>
> Yoav
>
> > On 18 Nov 2016, at 11:12, Sean Turner wr
I prefer TLS 1.3 but am also fine with TLS 4.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
> At IETF 97, the chairs lead a discussion to resolve whether the WG should
> rebrand TLS1.3 to something else. Slides can be found @
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-
> 97-tls-
I am a big fan of leaving it as TLS 1.3.
It feels more like evolution than revolution, even with the addition of
0-RTT. I would like to see a future TLS 2.0, but one that makes fundamental
changes which didn't make the cut for 1.3, e.g. moving to OPTLS.
--
Tony Arcieri
__
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:12:48AM +0900, Sean Turner wrote:
> At IETF 97, the chairs lead a discussion to resolve whether the WG should
> rebrand TLS1.3 to something else. Slides can be found @
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-tls-rebranding-aka-pr612-01.pdf.
>
> The conse
I already hummed in the room, but I think it should stay as TLS 1.3. Either
of TLS 2 or TLS 4 makes the SSL/TLS silliness worse. One matches SSL 2.0
and the other just makes all this weirder. (Do we really want 2.0 < 3.0 <
1.0 < 1.1 < 1.2 < 4?)
TLS 1.3 is the natural next number and doesn't make a
On Thursday, November 17, 2016 09:12:48 pm Sean Turner wrote:
> The consensus in the room was to leave it as is, i.e., TLS1.3, and to not
> rebrand it to TLS 2.0, TLS 2, or TLS 4. We need to confirm this decision on
> the list so please let the list know your top choice between:
>
> - Leave it
14 matches
Mail list logo
