Subject: [httpwg/http-extensions] Mention rejection of 0-RTT (#602)

From: HTTP issue updates <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2018 18:38:05 -0700

Our basic list of mitigations missed a fairly obvious one.

Mentioning it should help with the class of confusion Magnus N. had with the draft.

I decided not to include a note about the server being unable to examine early data before making this decision.  That's just something people will need to discover for themselves.  Generally, you have to decide whether you want 0-RTT without seeing any of it.  Partly this is because it avoids a potential deadlock, but mostly it's because the TLS stack will not even decrypt 0-RTT if it is rejected.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/602

-- Commit Summary --

  * Explicitly mention rejecting 0-RTT
  * Trim words
  * Discarded is a better word

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-httpbis-replay.md (14)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/602.patch
https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/602.diff

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/pull/602