enable DTLS negotiation

[David Woodhouse]

> On Sat, 2016-09-17 at 12:14 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
>> > > Can we ditch the first uint16 in payload, given that it is
>> > > entirely
>> > > redundant? Or am I misreading the spec to put it there in the
>> > > first place,
>> > > and the formal language is supposed to *include* what I called
>> > > 'extlen'
>> > According to the protocol tt has to be there.
>> OK, thanks for confirming that. So that brings me to my next
>> question,
>> which is... given that the protocol is just a draft, should we
>> propose
>> *changing* it not to include that redundant length?
>
> As this was a copy of the TLS 1.3 PSK format I doubt we can have any
> significant influence at it.

Well, that'sounds just a draft too... :)


-- 
dwmw2