On Thursday, July 23, 2015 06:49:06 am Aaron Zauner wrote:
> Dave Garrett wrote:
> >
> > enum {
> > handshake_failure(40),
> > unsupported_cipher_suites(71), /* formerly insufficient_security */
> > unsupported_dh_groups(72), /* new */
> > client_authentication_failure(73), /* new */
> > (255)
> > } AlertDescription;
>
> I mean I kinda agree that 'insufficent security' is a misleading name,
> but as it has been used for decades in TLS I'm a bit hesitant if it's a
> good idea to change the name now.
If that's really an issue, then it could just be insufficient_security,
insufficient_dh_security, & client_authentication_failure. The name isn't as
important as not producing errors without clear meanings.
Dave
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
