--On Thursday, December 20, 2007 05:52:18 PM +0100 Simon Josefsson <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I support the change below. Others?
I support the addition of a security layer bit to indicate channel binding negotiation failed, as described in the change in question.
However, the diff you provided also makes a second change, whose effect is to number bits with bit '0' being the least-significant bit rather than the most-significant bit, as is the convention used in the RFC Series. Please see ID-Checklist section 2.1 item 9, and draft-rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-08.txt section 3.4.
-- Jeff