On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 8:24 AM Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> > > On 17/02/2021 16:00, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 4:44 PM Stephen Farrell < > stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On 17/02/2021 00:34, Eric Rescorla wrote: > >>> How is it any harder to manage a multi-octet server-chosen value than a > >>> single-octet server-chosen value? > >> > >> Easier for the library on the server side. If it's >1 octet > >> then someone will want some semantics. If ==1 then they'll > >> have to accept none and possible collisions so it can be > >> handled independently inside the library. > >> > > > > The server is free to enforce 1 byte. > > A server operator would be free to do that. The person > writing the code likely would not be as some server > operator would also be free to try impose semantics > on a multibyte field. > Yeah, I don't really agree that we should restrict every server in order to make it easier for the people writing SSL stacks to tell server operators "no". -Ekr > S. > > > > > > -Ekr > > >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
