On Friday 03 June 2016 07:39:06 Xiaoyin Liu wrote: > > Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 11:33:54 +0300 > > From: ilariliusva...@welho.com > > To: tls@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [TLS] no fallbacks please [was: Downgrade protection, > > fallbacks, and server time]> > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 08:37:34AM +0200, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > > > A simpler proposal is: > > > Consider TLS 1.3 as a feature, and negotiate it using an empty > > > extension. If the extension is present a server assumes TLS 1.3. > > > > Well, AFAIK, in current editor's draft, key_share or pre_shared_key > > is always present and none are meaningful in TLS.1.2. > > But they cannot be used to distinguish TLS 1.3 with any future > versions, if these two extensions still exist in TLS 1.4, 1.5, ... .
TLSv1.4 and TLSv1.5 can introduce their own extensions, empty ones in worst case -- Regards, Hubert Kario Senior Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
