On 2009-09-30 15:34 PDT, Jouni Malinen wrote: > On Sep 30, 10:05 pm, Nelson B Bolyard <nel...@bolyard.me> wrote: >> These issues need to be brought up to the IETF TLS mailing list, ASAP. >> The last thing we want, IMO, is to have to implement a bunch of >> slightly-different incompatible extractor functions. :-/ > > It seems to be somewhat late to go through the IETF WG at this point > of the RFC process (after IESG approval), but I'm in the process of > confirming with the draft author and the IESG contact persons that > they agree with my interpretation of the issue
I wish I had known about this 48 hours earlier. The author of the extractor draft is also the TLS WG chair. I had lunch with him yesterday. If I had known about this ... :-/ > unfortunately no one seems to have noticed this issue before. I wasn't following the EAP drafts at all, and didn't realize they were using something so similar to the extractor drafts or I might have caught it myself. :-/ >> If you would like to contribute your patch to mozilla for consideration >> for inclusion into NSS, please file an enhancement request "bug" in >> bugzilla.mozilla.org and attach your patch to it. Thanks. > > I'll do that (or just add the patch as a modification request for the > existing case) once the IETF part gets resolved one way or another. OK, I look forward to it. > - Jouni /Nelson -- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
