On 12/16/2011 11:02 AM, Christopher Howard wrote: > On 12/14/2011 05:07 PM, Christopher Howard wrote: >> Hi. I was wondering if there was a timeline for TLS 1.2 support in >> libnss. I have a strong interest in the TLS extensions (particularly >> server_name) as well as, of course, improved security, but I also have a >> strong interest in Firefox and Chromium on the client side. >> >> >> >> > I'll take the silence as a "no". Maybe it would be better to ask: Is > there anyone even interested in seeing 1.2 implemented? More like "Holiday's are not likely the best time to get a schedule question answered".
The short answer is, there isn't a specific timeline, but it is on the radar. Currently we are looking at getting TLS 1.1 patches in first. I don't have the relevant bugs on the top of my head. However, we do support TLS extensions already. Extensions are defined in TLS 1.0, and just because a particular extension was added at some other time frame, doesn't mean it couldn't be support. For TLS 1.2, it's really the hash agility that's tricky, other extensions can and are supported. In particular, NSS already supports the server_name extension, and has for some time now. bob > > >
-- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
