Re: [TLS] Extensibility in SCVP draft

2022-07-25 Thread Rob Sayre
Hi, Doesn’t it depend on whether it would be easier to do this select* or deal with multiple validations in the same message? No one’s said that exactly afaik, but I haven’t watched the meeting yet. thanks, Rob * in the recent past, the stuff I’ve worked on has made this easy, but I agree

[TLS] Draft minutes

2022-07-25 Thread Salz, Rich
Draft minutes at https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-114-tls?edit And attached. # TLS at IETF 114 ## Administrivia (5 minutes) - Blue sheets; log into the "local" meetecho tool - Minute-taker: Rich Salz with help from Nick Doty - Jabber Scribe - NOTE WELL - Agenda revision; "TLS flags" document

[TLS] client attestation type in draft-fossati-tls-attestation

2022-07-25 Thread yangpeng...@chinamobile.com
Hi all, First of all, I think this document is very interesting and useful in scenarios like communication between TEE and client. In my point of view, I think the protocol could support other customized attestation formats for a wide range of use. For example, maybe a integrity measurement

Re: [TLS] Extensibility in SCVP draft

2022-07-25 Thread Russ Housley
I was thinking the same thing during the presentation. An extension for SCVP seems fine to me. Then in the future, if another validation comes along some day, a new extension can be assigned for that protocol. Russ > On Jul 25, 2022, at 4:13 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > > Take this: > >

Re: [TLS] Extensibility in SCVP draft

2022-07-25 Thread Salz, Rich
> We have a poor track record of being able to use these nested extension > points and it will be more efficient to just put the SCVP pieces in their own > extension. Yes! For example, the "SNI hostname" is such a nested construct, nobody uses anything other than "a hostname string."

[TLS] Extensibility in SCVP draft

2022-07-25 Thread Martin Thomson
Take this: struct { PathValidationType path_validation_type; select (path_validation_type) { case scvp: SCVPValidationRequest; } request; } PathValidationRequest; enum { scvp(1), (255) } PathValidationType; This adds a layer of extensibility that doesn't do a lot.

[TLS] RFC 9258 on Importing External Pre-Shared Keys (PSKs) for TLS 1.3

2022-07-25 Thread rfc-editor
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 9258 Title: Importing External Pre-Shared Keys (PSKs) for TLS 1.3 Author: D. Benjamin, C. A. Wood Status: Standards Track

[TLS] RFC 9257 on Guidance for External Pre-Shared Key (PSK) Usage in TLS

2022-07-25 Thread rfc-editor
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 9257 Title: Guidance for External Pre-Shared Key (PSK) Usage in TLS Author: R. Housley, J. Hoyland, M. Sethi,