Changing it would be incompatible, but at a glance it looks like EARLY_EXPORTER_MASTER_SECRET is the only label that would be impacted? We definitely should not rename that to ...MAIN... because that's not the new name. It's simply EARLY_EXPORTER_SECRET.
As for the right name, maybe we can still rename it? Does anyone even use early exporters at all? I vaguely remember it being added for some QUIC or tokbind thing that ultimately never actually materialized. BoringSSL doesn't currently implement early exporters, so renaming it would not have compatibility implications on our end. (Actually it's kind of odd that one uses the old terminology but EXPORTER_SECRET uses the new one. How'd we end up there?) On Fri, Feb 7, 2025, 11:23 Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > I read the draft. Looks good. Nice to see the word "octothorpe" instead > of pound sign, even if the document left of the last letter "e" > > More seriously, should the draft allow the "new" terminology proposed in > 8446bis (e.g., MAIN instead of MASTER etc)? > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
