Hi Folks, I have just published draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis-05, with the following changes:
* Update the extension table (Issue 1241) * Clarify user_canceled (Issue 1208) * Clarify 0-RTT cache side channels (Issue 1225) * Require that message reinjection be done with the current hash. Potentially a clarification and potentially a wire format change depending on previous interpretation (Issue 1227) I landed a few current PRs without review. If people think I handled these incorrectly or mis-merged, please flag that. This includes most of the outstanding issues and PRs. The following remain: PRS 1275 -- Clarifying unsolicited extensions [Waiting for review from Kaduk] 1270 -- The impact of excessive key updates [Working on text with MT] 1269 -- A new error for invalid tickets [see below] 1231 -- Update in light of RFC 8773 [I missed this, but will get to it on my next pass] SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES 1223, 1224 -- Revising the HRR rules 1278 -- There are no entries in the table for which TLS 1.3 messages token binding goes in. As preview of our discussion in London. I believe I can handle 1275, 1270, and 1231 at the editorial level. I believe we should not land 1269. As noted in the issue there is already an unknown_psk_identity, which captures this. I propose to close this issue. We need to agree on what appears in the table for token binding. I think this is mechanical. MT? DavidBen? Andrei? This leaves us with 1223 and 1224. I agree that the HRR semantics are a little confusing, but we don't seem to be making much progress on revising them and given that 8446 is already out, I think we should just publish this revision and then if people get energy to address this issue we can do so later. -Ekr
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls