Before people get too far down that road, here:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-httpbis-cant-01
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-tls-care-00

Andrei has made it clear that these do not work for his use case (I'm
not yet convinced that they are inadequate, but I am convinced of the
fact that Andrei thinks that they are inadequate ;).

Also:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-00#section-2.6.9

This is well-trodden ground.

On 10 August 2015 at 23:05, Dave Garrett <davemgarr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, August 10, 2015 01:10:38 pm Andrei Popov wrote:
>> > What sort of usecase you have in mind for this?
>>
>> This is to support a fairly common website design where the landing page 
>> does not require client auth, but subsequent request to a protected resource 
>> triggers client authentication within an existing TLS connection.
>> In TLS<=1.2, this was accomplished via renegotiation. In TLS1.3, there is no 
>> renegotiation, so we need an alternative solution if we want to support 
>> these existing sites over TLS1.3.
>
> This is just an idea, but what about just allowing a renegotiation-like 
> mechanism via 0-RTT with PSK resumption to be triggered on a TLS alert or 
> HTTP response code? The rough idea would be like this:
>
> 1) client connects to server and fetches public resources
> 2) client requests restricted resource; server sends auth required response 
> (TLS alert or HTTP code)
> 3) client creates a replacement connection using PSK-based resumption and 
> early data in the first flight for the request along with the client cert.
>
> There's a 1 roundtrip cost in there for a new TCP connection, which could 
> possibly be optimized away by using TCP fast open.
>
> This general concept is relatively simple in comparison to doing something 
> mid-connection. Instead of attempting to renegotiate on an existing 
> connection, just make creation of resumed connections cheap enough to start 
> over with client auth in the handshake from the start.
>
> It's a very rough idea, but I'm wondering if it sounds like something worth 
> discussing.
>
>
> Dave
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to