add text around modification to supported_groups requirement#17
add text around modification to supported_groups requirement#17
Conversation
davidben
left a comment
davidben
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM with two extremely silly nitpicks. :-)
draft-bmw-tls-pake13.md
Outdated
| (PAKE) protocol. This document describes a TLS extension `pake` | ||
| that can carry data necessary to execute a PAKE. | ||
| {{Section 9.2 of !TLS13=RFC8446}} specifies that a valid Client | ||
| Hello must include either a `pre_shared_key` extension or both |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Super nitpicky nitpick: I have never understood whether you are supposed to say "Client Hello" or "ClientHello" in prose. RFC 8446 uses "Client Hello" in section headers, but all the text says "ClientHello". I guess that would suggest this should say ClientHello. 🤷
draft-bmw-tls-pake13.md
Outdated
| handshake to execute a password-authenticated key establishment | ||
| (PAKE) protocol. This document describes a TLS extension `pake` | ||
| that can carry data necessary to execute a PAKE. | ||
| {{Section 9.2 of !TLS13=RFC8446}} specifies that a valid Client |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nitpick: I'm not sure if this is actually the style or if I'm just making this up, but I feel like I usually don't see normative text in Introduction sections. I might suggest either moving this to Client Behavior (where we talk about the client extension) or maybe in a separate section after Key Schedule Modifications.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Other reason to move this is that, in the intro, we haven't yet introduced the pake extension, so this should probably go somewhere after the point where pake is defined.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Very true, will move
2 participants
Initial attempt to clarify the new requirements for a valid client hello.