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

Mandatory to implement key exchange/cipher suite #498

Closed
martinthomson opened this issue Jun 5, 2014 · 6 comments · Fixed by #562
Closed

Mandatory to implement key exchange/cipher suite #498

martinthomson opened this issue Jun 5, 2014 · 6 comments · Fixed by #562

Comments

@martinthomson
Copy link
Collaborator

It has been noted that there is an opportunity for interoperability failure with the rules we have regarding ephemeral key exchange.

e.g., client has only DHE, server has only ECDHE, can't use HTTP/2

Do we want to specify a mandatory to implement cipher suite so that we can avoid this?

@ekr
Copy link
Contributor

ekr commented Jun 6, 2014

Yes, I think you do. TLS 1.3 will be mandating ephemeral key exchange, so I think you just want to use whatever their MTI is (presumably either DHE or ECDHE with AES-GCM). I expect to have a preliminary answer to this in YVR. Will that be soon enough?

@martinthomson
Copy link
Collaborator Author

TOR, I hope. But I think that should suffice. We can discuss whether we try to preempt that decision or leave a placeholder.

@ekr
Copy link
Contributor

ekr commented Jun 6, 2014

Sorry, I meant YYZ.

@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Jun 6, 2014

Discussed in NYC; will make a decision about it in Toronto.

Under discussion - ECDHE / DHE + RSA + AES-GCM + SHA256. Maybe another too.

@mnot mnot changed the title Mandatory implement key exchange/cipher suite Mandatory to implement key exchange/cipher suite Jun 24, 2014
@mnot mnot added this to the WGLC milestone Jun 27, 2014
@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Jul 2, 2014

We need to settle this for WGLC. @ekr, any chance of getting a decision earlier?

@mnot
Copy link
Member

mnot commented Jul 24, 2014

#562 is editor-ready.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants