On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Martin Rex <mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com> wrote:
<aside>That's been the standard for PKIX RFCs for at least ten years
(actively acknowledged by WG mmembers), although perhaps its spread
to other groups should be discouraged.</aside>
I fully agree.
That may be attributed to the fact that a large part of PKIX is dealing
with policy issues with the objective to prevent/prohibit interoperability.
On the contrary. I believe allowing the sending of both SCSV and extension
might harm interoperability instead. Consider the case of most popular client
implementations are sending both SCSV and extension (it's easier to do so).
A developer of a server might then consider checking only for SCSV (since all
of the popular ones he tested with send both). Thus interoperability with less
popular clients that only send extension stops.
This scenario might not be very likely, but this kind of issues were
not rare in
TLS for quite long :)
best regards,
Nikos
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf