I'm not seeing a lot of value here. Remember that servers are not required (and have never been required) to do session resumption, but much of the overhead of doing it (having to have a database, session ticket machinery) is associated with being willing to do session resumption at all, so if a small fraction of clients would tell you that they're not interested in resumption, it's not clear that buys you much.
Are there any server operators who think this is a useful feature and can explain why? -Ekr On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Ilari Liusvaara < ilari.liusva...@elisanet.fi> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 02:28:40PM -0400, Dave Garrett wrote: > > On Saturday, July 18, 2015 01:06:33 am Brian Smith wrote: > > > This is not really what I was intending when I suggested the feature. > I was > > > intending for their to be an indication, in the ClientHello, that the > > > server should not do any of the work that it would normally do to make > the > > > session resumable. > > > > Ok, I might as well write up the generic solution then: > > > > > https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/compare/master...davegarrett:sessionrequest > > Are the features besides "don't bother making resumable session, I won't > resume." needed? > > E.g. For what would client hinting session lifetime be useful for? > > > -Ilari > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
