[TLS] Re: Review of draft-santesson-tls-gssapi-03
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[TLS] Re: Review of draft-santesson-tls-gssapi-03
Larry Zhu <lzhu at windows.microsoft.com> writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> do you think this is better? Thanks.
>
>> Ah, I see. You fail to specify the size of the length field though. I would prefer to make the token explicit though, by adding e.g.:
>>
>> struct {
>> opaque gss_api_data<0..2^32-1>;
>> } GSSAPIExtensionData;
> The size of the length field is defined in section 2.3 of RFC3546. It is 2 in octets.
Ok, now I get it, thanks.
>> If you want to have this field, you need to specify how implementations
>> should behave if multiple TokenTransfer tokens are received during the
>> handshake and when only some of them contain supported token_type's.
>> Otherwise this structure can never be used in any future extension in a
>> reliable way.
>
> A new value would indicate a new handshake message. I would make this
> clear, hopefully that addresses your comments w.r.t. this point.
A new handshake message type or just a new handshake message? If the
latter, I still think you need to discuss how implementations should
react if they receive unsupported token_type's. I look forwward to new
text.
> Assuming that, all your comments have been addressed to your
> satisfactory, right?
Yes I think so, although I may have opinions on how the issues are
ultimately solved in later drafts.
/Simon
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.