IMHO, no reason not to move forward with 3.x, ever
On Sun, Jun 25, 2023, 13:07 SUSAN HINRICHS
wrote:
> I think Chris' original proposal of requiring at least 1.1.1 is sound. That
> would mean in practice stop supporting openssl 1.0.2.
>
> While 1.1.1 has been moved to EOL, I think it is prematur
> On Jun 25, 2023, at 12:07, SUSAN HINRICHS wrote:
>
> While 1.1.1 has been moved to EOL, I think it is premature to stop
> supporting 1.1.1. At Aviatrix we are using 1.1.1, and starting to look at
> openssl 3.0. I think a number of other ATS users are in a similar
> situation. Perhaps in a
I think Chris' original proposal of requiring at least 1.1.1 is sound. That
would mean in practice stop supporting openssl 1.0.2.
While 1.1.1 has been moved to EOL, I think it is premature to stop
supporting 1.1.1. At Aviatrix we are using 1.1.1, and starting to look at
openssl 3.0. I think a nu
