Re: [TLS] What's the proper alert for sequence wrap.

["Omirjan Batyrbaev" <batyr at sympatico.ca>]

Hi,

How in practice does a SSL/TLS server assigns the new session IDs?
Say, does it increment the older session ID?
-Omirjan
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike" <mike-list at pobox.com>
To: "tls mailing list" <tls at ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: [TLS] What's the proper alert for sequence wrap.


> Practically speaking, you don't ever need to worry about this.
> Even if you send a billion records every second, it would take
> 584 years to wrap the sequence number.
>
> Mike
>
>
> Andrew Fan wrote:
> > The RFC4346 says:
> >
> >      Sequence numbers are of type uint64 and may not
> >      exceed 2^64-1.  Sequence numbers do not wrap.  If a TLS
> >      implementation would need to wrap a sequence number, it must
> >      renegotiate instead.
> >
> > In a implementation, if one does not want to support sequence number
> > wrap with renegotiation, a fatal alert should be sent to peer if the
> > sequence number exceed. Or if one side receive a wrapped sequence
> > number, a fatal alert also should be sent to peer. However, I don't find
> > proper alert descriptions for both read and write sequence number exceed
> > cases.
> >
> > Any suggestions?
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS at lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>


_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls