On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:08:37PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 1/22/18 02:29, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> However there is as well the argument that this list's contents are not
>> directly used now, and based on what I saw from the MacOS SSL and GnuTLS
>> patches that would not be the case after either.
>
> Right, there is no facility for negotiating the channel binding type, so
> a boolean result should be enough.
I am not completely convinced either that we need to complicate the code
to handle channel binding type negotiation.
> In which case we wouldn't actually need this for GnuTLS yet.
Sure. This depends mainly on how the patch for Mac's Secure Transport
moves forward.
--
Michael