Re: oops?

Hi Joe,

We are discussing the same issue on the Netconf mailing list and there are
two questions from:

[email protected]
I wanna ask why immediately instead of sending pening writes before close
down the connection.

[email protected]:
And I like to add whether it is normal practice that the TLS teardown
procedure is application protocol specific. RFC 5246 section 7.2.1 discusses
closure alerts in TLS 1.2 and I like to understand why we need additional
text for NETCONF over TLS. //or syslog-tls.
Best regards,
Badra


On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:06 PM, Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Same text is in RFC 5246.   Looks like we should delete the cited text
> in syslog-transport-tls-13.
>
>
> Joe
>  > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tom.petch [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 10:17 AM
> > To: Chris Lonvick (clonvick); [email protected]; Joseph Salowey
> > (jsalowey)
> > Subject: oops?
> >
> > Chris, Joe
> >
> > From syslog-transport-tls-13
> >
> > "When the client has received
> >    the close_notify alert from the server and still has
> > pending data to
> >    send, it SHOULD send the pending data before sending the
> > close_notify
> >    alert."
> >
> > From RFC4346
> >
> > " The other party MUST respond with a close_notify
> >    alert of its own and close down the connection immediately,
> >    discarding any pending writes.  "
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Syslog mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
>

_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog