Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-psk-new-mac-aes-gcm-03.txt

["Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey at cisco.com>]

> Pasi:
> Do you have specific use cases in mind that could justify that?
> 
> All:
> Or is the perceived view of WG policy wrong, and consistency 
> with RFC 5289 less important than extended utility?
> 
> My proposal:
> 
> It might make sense to now leave the draft "as is" and defer 
> the final decision on this amendment until comments from IETF 
> LC have been received and can be considered as well.
> Documenting the question in the PROTO Writeup could direct 
> the community at large to consider this topic during LC, and 
> doing so thus would be a good chance to see if someone 
> explicitely calls for the addition if this feature.
>
[Joe] Since there has been no more discussion, this is the approach I will take with Proto write-up and submission to the IESG. 

My personal opinion is that we should keep the draft as it is.  I don't see a glaring need for TLS 1.1 compatibility.  As a minor point of consistency I think the new long MACs should use the TLS 1.2 PRF.  



 
> Kind regards,
>   Alfred.
> 
> -- 
> 
> +------------------------+------------------------------------
> --------+
> | TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., 
> Dipl.-Phys.  |
> | Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18 
>         |
> | D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  ah at TR-Sys.de             
>         |
> +------------------------+------------------------------------
> --------+
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
> 
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls