Subject: Re: [Trans] [trans] #142 (rfc6962-bis): Specify what TLS clients should send in the extension_data of the transparency_info TLS extension

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:56:42 -0000

#142: Specify what TLS clients should send in the extension_data of the
transparency_info TLS extension

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 Advice obtained from exchange with Adam Langley:
 - The server doesn't have much control over which logs it has SCTs from so
 it may not be entirely useful to specify them.
 - Because we aren't certain what we'll need we'll just be building an
 extension-within-extension mechanism, might as well use the existing TLS
 extensions mechanism.
 - Specifying that the client sends nothing but the server does not reject
 non-empty extension_data, but, because we won't be using it initially, "it
 might get bug-rusted before you can use it".

 So the conclusion is we leave the extension data empty, which simplifies
 the protocol but does not prevent us from sending additional data in the
 future using a different TLS extension.

-- 
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |       Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                    |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                     |   Milestone:
Component:  rfc6962-bis               |     Version:
 Severity:  -                         |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                            |
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------

Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/142#comment:2>
trans <https://tools.ietf.org/trans/>

---

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 13:05:34 -0000

Out for review in https://github.com/google/certificate-transparency-
 rfcs/pull/138

Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/142#comment:3>
trans <https://tools.ietf.org/trans/>

---

From: "trans issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:23:39 -0000

Changes (by [email-masked]):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed

-- 
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |       Owner:  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                    |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  major                     |   Milestone:  review
Component:  rfc6962-bis               |     Version:
 Severity:  -                         |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:                            |
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------

Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/trans/trac/ticket/142#comment:5>
trans <https://tools.ietf.org/trans/>