In addition, they are already part of TLS, so the question would be if we have consensus to remove them....
-Ekr On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Nico Williams <n...@cryptonector.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 01:20:37PM -0700, Brian Smith wrote: > > I think it is a good idea to remove DH_anon_* and similar ECDH_anon_* > > cipher suites. > > > > This isn't an endorsement of the raw public key modes. > > Sure, one can always use self-signed certs (at an even higher cost to do > anonymity). If we're going to raise the cost of anonymity for the sake > of simplicity in TLS 1.3, do let's try to keep that cost from > escalating. Raw public keys are not a large additional complexity cost. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
