On Feb 15, 2016 11:02 AM, "Brian Smith" <br...@briansmith.org> wrote: > > Robert Cragie <robert.cra...@gridmerge.com> wrote: >> >> I was told it wouldn't receive much interest because it is based on TLS 1.2 and the current focus is very much on 1.3. The aim is to get an informational RFC out shortly. > > > I'm looking forward to the RFC and I would be happy to offer feedback on it before or after the first public draft is published. > > BTW, if someone tells you something won't receive much interest, it doesn't mean it won't receive much interest. It more likely means *they* don't want it to receive much interest. I think you might be surprised how much interest there actually is.
At the time this work was being done JPAKE had a rather sorry excuse for a security proof. It's only recently that a solid one has been created. At the same time SRP did not receive much usage when included in OpenSSL, and with an RFC describing it. PAKE in SSL has always been a solution in search of a problem. > > Cheers, > Brian > > _______________________________________________ > 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
