[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH

To: <pgut001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <jnordqvist@xxxxxxxxxx>, <tls@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
From: <Pasi.Eronen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:28:53 +0300
Cc:
In-reply-to: <E1GceUB-0005Lr-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/tls>
List-help: <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.lists.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:tls@lists.ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Thread-index: Acb4EvzX9wj2Dr+GRbOh5Ra/c4sP4wADR2GQ
Thread-topic: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH

pgut001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> cryptlib definitely doesn't do static DH... in fact does anything?
> Why would anyone do it at all, for that matter?

Based on a quick look at the source code, at least OpenSSL, Mozilla
NSS, and PureTLS appear to support static DH. 

But I don't know why they do it either (or whether that part of the
code has actually ever been used or tested :-)

Best regards,
Pasi

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
  - From: EKR
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
  - From: Dr Stephen Henson
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
  - From: Bodo Moeller

References:
- RE: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
  - From: Peter Gutmann

Prev by Date: RE: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
Next by Date: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
Previous by thread: RE: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
Next by thread: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.1 and static DH
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread