Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ECH extensions added to the main SSLKEYLOGFILE spec #17

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Dec 11, 2024

Conversation

yaroslavros
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed on the mailing list, here is my first stab at merging specs together.

Copy link
Collaborator

@martinthomson martinthomson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Conditional approval.

I've been pretty aggressive in trimming the text here, but that is mostly stylistic. The only one I'm not OK with either way is the security considerations change. But we can discuss that separately.

draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@yaroslavros
Copy link
Contributor Author

Everything seems to be resolved now. Thanks for the thorough review, @martinthomson .

draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
| ECH_CONFIG | ECHConfig used for construction of the ECH | This document |

New assignments in the "SSLKEYLOGFILE Labels" registry will be administered by IANA through
IETF Review procedure {{!RFC8126}}.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm going to start a thread on this. I think that we should instead go for Specification Required, with experts advised to reject registrations for secrets that can be used to derive other secrets (other than _TRAFFIC_SECRET_0, that should be unnecessary).

@martinthomson martinthomson merged commit 8f07b32 into tlswg:main Dec 11, 2024
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants