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

RFC 8449 - Record Size Limit Extension for TLS #8187

Open
zapotek6 opened this issue Feb 8, 2019 · 7 comments
Open

RFC 8449 - Record Size Limit Extension for TLS #8187

zapotek6 opened this issue Feb 8, 2019 · 7 comments
Labels
triaged: feature The issue/pr requests/adds a feature
Milestone

Comments

@zapotek6
Copy link

zapotek6 commented Feb 8, 2019

Hi, I've looked into the code and I didn't find the RFC8449 support. I found the RFC 6066 Max TLS Fragment Size extension in order to limit the TLS record size.

If I don't have oversight it, there's a plan to integrate it?

Regards

Thanks
Mirko

@mattcaswell
Copy link
Member

There are no current plans to integrate it. But if someone were to contribute a PR for it then it would be considered.

@Wallboy
Copy link

Wallboy commented Feb 21, 2019

+1

I would also like to see this extension implemented in OpenSSL.

@mattcaswell mattcaswell added the triaged: feature The issue/pr requests/adds a feature label Nov 5, 2019
@stryker2k2
Copy link

I would also like to see this extension implemented in OpenSSL.

Same. Maybe I'll try my hand at implementing it.

@t8m t8m added this to the Post 3.0.0 milestone Aug 9, 2021
@metalinjection
Copy link

Hello there,
I would be also interested in the feature +1
Since I try to communicate from OpenSSL with servers with a small RAM footprint it is essential to make the packages smaller. I can’t change the server requesting that.
Cheers

@FdaSilvaYY
Copy link
Contributor

See PR #18248 "Implement RFC 8449 Support"

@nhorman
Copy link
Contributor

nhorman commented Jun 16, 2024

Seems like the PR for this got stalled. @bernd-edlinger do you have any plans to revive this work.

If not, suggesting we close this as not planned

@nhorman
Copy link
Contributor

nhorman commented Aug 9, 2024

@zapotek6 are you still interested in working on this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
triaged: feature The issue/pr requests/adds a feature
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants