On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 5:19 PM, David Benjamin <david...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:07 PM Dave Garrett <davemgarr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Friday, January 15, 2016 03:45:34 pm David Benjamin wrote: >> > This is a proposal for revising SignatureAlgorithm/HashAlgorithm. In TLS >> > 1.2, signature algorithms are spread across the handshake. >> [...] >> > I propose we fold the negotiable parameters under one name. >> [...] >> > 2. Remove HashAlgorithm, SignatureAlgorithm, SignatureAndHashAlgorithm >> as >> > they are. Introduce a new SignatureAlgorithm u16 type and negotiate that >> > instead. >> >> I previously proposed this here: >> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg18035.html >> >> ekr was against it, though it hasn't been discussed that throughly. >> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg18036.html > > > Ah, thanks! I must have missed this discussion. Or perhaps I saw it and > forgot. > > ekr, are you still against this sort of thing? I think the new CFRG > signature algorithms tying decisions together is a good argument for why > we'd want this. If we believe this trend is to continue (and I hope it > does. Ed25519 is a nice and simple interface), trying to decompose it all > seems poor. > I'm not sure. I agree that the CFRG thing seems to be a new development. I'll try to confirm my previous opinion or develop a new one over the weekend :) Ekr > David > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
