On 17/03/2021 14:45, Ben Smyth wrote:
Do you at least agree that Google is in violation of the 6.1
wording requiring that it sends a Close Alert before sending
a TCP FIN?
Which aspect of Section 6.1 do you think Google doesn't comply with?
"Each party MUST send a "close_notify" alert
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021, 15:31 Jeremy Harris, wrote:
> On 17/03/2021 07:15, Ben Smyth wrote:
> > Perhaps one scenario where that
> > behaviour is useful: An endpoint is about to be comprimised and raises an
> > alert to avoid secrets being leaked.
>
> I'd have tout that a section 6.2 Error Alert
On 17/03/2021 07:15, Ben Smyth wrote:
Perhaps one scenario where that
behaviour is useful: An endpoint is about to be comprimised and raises an
alert to avoid secrets being leaked.
I'd have tout that a section 6.2 Error Alert would be more
appropriate in such a situation, than the (implicitly
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 08:15:53AM +0100, Ben Smyth wrote:
> > Do I understand that right? And if so, what is the point of the
> > language in the RFC that appears to permit a half-close?
>
> Specifications don't define systems, they guide design. The specification
> does not "requir[e] an end
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021, 20:03 Jeremy Harris, wrote:
> On 16/03/2021 07:53, Ben Smyth wrote:
> > Further, is it reasonable for the above first end to
> >> expect the above second end to continue processing and
> >> sending data that would have been sent in the absence of
> >> such a first Close
On 16/03/2021 07:53, Ben Smyth wrote:
Further, is it reasonable for the above first end to
expect the above second end to continue processing and
sending data that would have been sent in the absence of
such a first Close Alert?
The endpoint should expect their interlocutor to ignore any
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 11:52, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> Could people please confirm a detail of TLS 1.3 session
> close behaviour? Specifically, are half-closes supported
> in similar fashion to TCP half-closes - in that it is
> legitimate for one end to issue a Close Notify alert
> and for the
Hi,
Could people please confirm a detail of TLS 1.3 session
close behaviour? Specifically, are half-closes supported
in similar fashion to TCP half-closes - in that it is
legitimate for one end to issue a Close Notify alert
and for the other end to receive that alert but continue
to transmit
