Open lhuang04 opened 3 years ago
The change suggested refers to the exporter used with TLS 1.2. However, the label used "CLIENT RANDOM" is not one of the registered labels, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5705 and https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters/tls-parameters.xhtml#exporter-labels.
Since even the two key derivation functions are different, I wonder whether a separate code path for 1.2 is required and whether this entry should be removed.
Summary:
CLIENT RANDOM
->CLIENT_RANDOM
. This appears a typo as it is CLIENT_RANDOM in upstream and in the document.Test Plan:
tests/ssl-opt.sh
Reviewers:
Subscribers:
Tasks:
Tags:
Notes:
Signed-off-by:
line from the committer to certify that the contribution is made under the terms of the Developer Certificate of Origin.Description
A few sentences describing the overall goals of the pull request's commits.
Status
READY/IN DEVELOPMENT/HOLD
Requires Backporting
When there is a bug fix, it should be backported to all maintained and supported branches. Changes do not have to be backported if:
Yes | NO
Which branch?
Migrations
If there is any API change, what's the incentive and logic for it.
YES | NO
Additional comments
Any additional information that could be of interest
Todos
Steps to test or reproduce
Outline the steps to test or reproduce the PR here.