The pair was a remnant of some weird statefulness and also ChangeCipherSpec
having a "sequence number" to make the pqueue turn into an array.
Change-Id: Iffd82594314df43934073bd141faee0fc167ed5f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8436
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Post-handshake retransmit in DTLS no longer needs that scratch space.
Change-Id: I2f070675d72426e61b19dab5bcac40bf62b8fd8d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8434
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It is an explicit copy of something, but it's a lot easier to reason about than
the init_buf/init_num gynmastics we were previously doing. This is along the
way to getting init_buf out of here.
Change-Id: Ia1819ba9db60ef6db09dd60d208dbc95fcfb4bd2
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8432
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It doesn't really convey anything useful. Leave ssl_get_message alone for now
since it's called everywhere in the handshake and I'm about to tweak it
further.
Change-Id: I6f3a74c170e818f624be8fbe5cf6b796353406df
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8430
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The payload comments aren't necessary now that our parsing code is readable in
itself. The check is impossible to hit.
Change-Id: Ib41ad606babda903a9fab50de3189f97e99cac2f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8248
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
TLS 1.2 has a long series of optional messages within a flight. We really
should send and process these synchronously. In the meantime, the 'skip'
pattern is probably the best we can get away with. Otherwise we have too many
state transitions to think about. (The business with CCS, NPN, and ChannelID is
particularly a headache. Session tickets aren't great either.)
Change-Id: I84e391a6410046372cf9c6989be056a27606ad19
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8246
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is the only codepath where ssl->version can get a garbage value, which is
a little concerning. Since, in all these cases, the peer is failing to connect
and speaks so low a version we don't even accept it anymore, there is probably
not much value in letting them distinguish protocol_version from a record-layer
version number mismatch, where enforced (which will give a version-related
error anyway).
Should we get a decode_error or so just before version negotiation, we'd have
this behavior already.
Change-Id: I9b3e5685ab9c9ad32a7b7e3129363cd1d4cdaaf4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8420
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Match the actual name of the type.
Change-Id: I0ad27196ee2876ce0690d13068fa95f68b05b0da
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8187
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Give them much more reasonable names.
Change-Id: Id14d983ab3231da21a4f987e662c2e01af7a2cd6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8185
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
