Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Reword paragraph on HelloRetryRequest (#3826)

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2020 21:42:58 -0700

This was a little clumsy.  Nothing major, it just annoyed me.
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826

-- Commit Summary --

  * Reword paragraph on HelloRetryRequest

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-tls.md (18)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826.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/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826

---

From: Marten Seemann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2020 22:54:11 -0700

@marten-seemann commented on this pull request.

> -{{!TLS13}}) can be used to correct a client's incorrect KeyShare extension as
-well as for a stateless round-trip check. From the perspective of QUIC, this
-just looks like additional messages carried in Initial packets. Although it is
-in principle possible to use this feature for address verification in QUIC,
-QUIC implementations SHOULD instead use the Retry feature (see Section 8.1 of
-{{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}). HelloRetryRequest is still used to request key shares.
+In TLS over TCP, the HelloRetryRequest message (see Section 4.1.4 of {{!TLS13}})
+can be used to request that a client provide new information, such as a key
+share, or to validate some characteristic of the client.  From the perspective
+of QUIC, HelloRetryRequest is not differentiated from other cryptographic
+handshake messages that are carried in Initial packets. Although it is
+in principle possible to use this feature for address verification, QUIC
+implementations SHOULD instead use the Retry feature; see Section 8.1 of
+{{QUIC-TRANSPORT}}.
+
+HelloRetryRequest is still used to request key shares or other information

This seems to duplicate the first sentence of the previous paragraph. Can we just delete it?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826#pullrequestreview-442789890

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2020 23:24:43 -0700

@martinthomson pushed 1 commit.

b194f64d522074b3ee677bf5325563cdf3bfa124  Leaner is good

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
View it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826/files/2ae16098ac4a98c56ad7d6bc5c5b0cca521b660f..b194f64d522074b3ee677bf5325563cdf3bfa124

---

From: Marten Seemann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2020 23:32:15 -0700

@marten-seemann approved this pull request.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826#pullrequestreview-442804293

---

From: Nick Banks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2020 08:13:20 -0700

@nibanks approved this pull request.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826#pullrequestreview-443168047

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 07:19:42 -0700

@MikeBishop approved this pull request.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826#pullrequestreview-445663143

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 00:18:56 -0700

Merged #3826 into master.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3826#event-3542814341