[Anima] Re: Concern about draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13-10 with IoT protocols

2025-04-10 Thread Salz, Rich
Is the second paragraph of Sec 4 not sufficient? It says “If deployment considerations are a concern, the protocol MAY specify TLS 1.2 as an additional, non-default option.” ___ Anima mailing list -- anima@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ani

[Anima] Re: Concern about draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13-10 with IoT protocols

2025-04-09 Thread Michael Richardson
Alan DeKok wrote: > (Not speaking as UTA chair) > On Apr 8, 2025, at 12:05 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote: >> Recommending, but not requiring the use of TLS 1.3 is unfortunately necessary for >> quite a while for the much larger space of IOT equipment and protocols written >> f

[Anima] Re: Concern about draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13-10 with IoT protocols

2025-04-09 Thread Valery Smyslov
(speaking not as UTA chair) Hi Toerless, if we are talking about IOT devices, then I've been told a lot of times by more knowledgeable than I people that IOT devices mostly rely on DTLS and not on TLS. And DTLS is explicitly mentioned in the draft as being out of scope. Regards, Valery. > D

[Anima] Re: Concern about draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13-10 with IoT protocols

2025-04-08 Thread mohamed . boucadair
Hi Toerless, all, Please see inline one clarification comment as I think that is important. Cheers, Med > -Message d'origine- > De : Toerless Eckert > Envoyé : mardi 8 avril 2025 18:05 > À : draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org; > u...@ietf.org; i...@ietf.org >

[Anima] Re: Concern about draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13-10 with IoT protocols

2025-04-08 Thread Alan DeKok
(Not speaking as UTA chair) On Apr 8, 2025, at 12:05 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote: > Recommending, but not requiring the use of TLS 1.3 is unfortunately necessary > for > quite a while for the much larger space of IOT equipment and protocols written > for non-browser enviroments where IOT equipme