On Jan 15, 2025 at 11:37:58 AM, Quynh Dang wrote:
Defining a minimum percentage of votes to have the consensus would take
> care of the problem and the chairs at the IETF would love that.
>
No it wouldn’t and no we (speaking as former co-chair of two WGs) wouldn’t.
I’m not sure why we’re relit
Perhaps useful: I’m a customer of cryptography but not a cryptographer. I
have learned a tremendous amount about the open issues and state of play by
reading this discourse. Someone could blog it, and that kind of blog tends
to get on YComb and be widely read. But I think it would be of great hel
I’m not a TLS insider but I’ve been watching this discussion, and…
On Aug 3, 2024 at 9:36:16 AM, hannes.tschofenig=40gmx@dmarc.ietf.org
wrote:
> Hence, this is not a mechanism that allows a third party in the middle of
> the network communication to somehow decrypt traffic. It is a tool for
Is anyone from AWS active on the WG? When I left AWS a few years back,
they had a very active group entirely dedicated to this kind of work, and
any version of TLS is obviously relevant to AWS. Might be worth reaching
out to them.
On Jun 1, 2024 at 1:32:20 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> Thanks for
How much data is too much?
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 12:02 PM Paterson Kenneth <
kenny.pater...@inf.ethz.ch> wrote:
> Hi Rich,
>
>
>
> We speak of reaching data limits, and the process of changing the key has
> many names, e.g. key rotation, key renewal, key refreshing, key updating.
>
>
>
> Any of
