[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-15.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-15.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-15.txt Pages: 17

[TLS] Protocol Action: 'IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-14.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document: - 'IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS' (draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-14.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Transport Layer Security Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Paul Wouters and Deb Cooley. A U

[TLS] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-14.txt

Hi! This version addresses the IESG and IANA comments received during their reviews. spt > On Jun 16, 2025, at 09:52, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-14.txt is now available. It is a work > item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-14.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-14.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-14.txt Pages: 17

[TLS] Re: Mike Bishop's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

I just wish the two TLS registries had links to each other. ___ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org

[TLS] Re: Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

Hi Sean, > On Jun 4, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Sean Turner wrote: > > > >> On Jun 3, 2025, at 08:57, Mahesh Jethanandani via Datatracker >> wrote: >> >> Mahesh Jethanandani has entered the following ballot position for >> draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: N

[TLS] Re: Mike Bishop's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

List ; Deirdre Connolly Subject: Re: Mike Bishop's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT) On Jun 3, 2025, at 14:11, Mike Bishop via Datatracker wrote: Mike Bishop has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection When respo

[TLS] Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

> On Jun 2, 2025, at 11:25, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker > wrote: > > Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresse

[TLS] Re: Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

> On Jun 3, 2025, at 08:57, Mahesh Jethanandani via Datatracker > wrote: > > Mahesh Jethanandani has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > ema

[TLS] Re: Mike Bishop's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

> On Jun 3, 2025, at 14:11, Mike Bishop via Datatracker > wrote: > > Mike Bishop has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses i

[TLS] Mike Bishop's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

Mike Bishop has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

[TLS] Mahesh Jethanandani's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

Mahesh Jethanandani has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please

[TLS] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

[TLS] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

[TLS] Re: Mohamed Boucadair's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

Hi Sean, Thanks for the follow-up. I also checked iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12&url2=draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13, the changes look good to me. Thank you. Cheers, Med De : Sean Turner Envoyé : mercredi 28 mai 2025 22:00 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET Cc : The IESG ; draft-

[TLS] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13.txt

at 09:46, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13.txt is now available. It is a work > item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. > > Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS > Authors: Joe Salowey >S

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-13.txt Pages: 17

[TLS] Re: Mohamed Boucadair's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

below. > On May 18, 2025, at 07:52, Mohamed Boucadair via Datatracker > wrote: > > Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: Yes > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addre

[TLS] Re: Deb Cooley's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

gt; >>> On May 27, 2025, at 10:26, Deb Cooley via Datatracker >> <mailto:nore...@ietf.org>> wrote: >>> >>> Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for >>> draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: No Objection >>> >>> When responding,

[TLS] Re: Deb Cooley's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

f.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here

[TLS] Re: Deb Cooley's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

> On May 27, 2025, at 10:26, Deb Cooley via Datatracker > wrote: > > Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses i

[TLS] Deb Cooley's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

[TLS] Gunter Van de Velde's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

Gunter Van de Velde has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please

[TLS] Mohamed Boucadair's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: (with COMMENT)

Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to

[TLS] Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

-rfc8447bis@ietf.org; last-c...@ietf.org; TLS List Subject: Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11 On Apr 3, 2025, at 10:54 AM, Giuseppe Fioccola via Datatracker mailto:nore...@ietf.org>> wrote: Reviewer: Giuseppe Fioccola Review result: Has Nits This document updat

[TLS] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12.txt

HI! This version addresses the Directorate comments received to date. spt > On Apr 11, 2025, at 12:21 PM, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12.txt is now available. It is a work > item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF.

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-12.txt Pages: 19

[TLS] Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

> On Apr 3, 2025, at 10:54 AM, Giuseppe Fioccola via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Giuseppe Fioccola > Review result: Has Nits > > This document updates the changes in RFC 8447 and requests IANA to make > changes > to a number of TLS and DTLS registries. In particular, it updates the > "

[TLS] Genart ietf last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

Document: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Reviewer: Susan Hares Review result: Ready I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please

[TLS] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

Reviewer: Giuseppe Fioccola Review result: Has Nits This document updates the changes in RFC 8447 and requests IANA to make changes to a number of TLS and DTLS registries. In particular, it updates the "Recommended" column in TLS registries by defining a third value "D" for items that are discoura

[TLS] Re: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

> On Mar 14, 2025, at 3:16 AM, Benjamin Schwartz via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Benjamin Schwartz > Review result: Ready > > Nit: "leave an items", lower case "* update the note on the role ...". Fixed via: https://github.com/tlswg/rfc8447bis/pull/70 > Use of BCP 14 "IANA SHALL" see

[TLS] Re: Artart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

Perfect; thanks so much! Barry On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 2:46 PM Sean Turner wrote: > > On Mar 17, 2025, at 7:21 AM, Barry Leiba via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Barry Leiba > Review result: Ready with Nits > > This document is in good shape and does what it needs to do. I have just > one

[TLS] Re: Artart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

> On Mar 17, 2025, at 7:21 AM, Barry Leiba via Datatracker > wrote: > > Reviewer: Barry Leiba > Review result: Ready with Nits > > This document is in good shape and does what it needs to do. I have just one > very minor substantive comment, and two very nitty nits: > > — Section 3.1 — > >

[TLS] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

Reviewer: Barry Leiba Review result: Ready with Nits This document is in good shape and does what it needs to do. I have just one very minor substantive comment, and two very nitty nits: — Section 3.1 — If the "Recommended" column is set to "D" the item is discouraged and SHOULD NOT or

[TLS] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11

Reviewer: Benjamin Schwartz Review result: Ready Nit: "leave an items", lower case "* update the note on the role ...". Use of BCP 14 "IANA SHALL" seems odd, but I assume IANA process experts have reviewed this formulation. I wish this document would populate the "Comment" column on some of the

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-11.txt Pages: 17

[TLS] Re: AD review draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10

> On Mar 7, 2025, at 12:51 PM, Sean Turner wrote: > >> Section 5 TLS Cipher Suites Registry >> >> This section contains some reasoning why it is Discouraging things. The >> current >> IANA registry also contains such reasoning on the form of notes, but this >> section >> does not add to the

[TLS] Re: AD review draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10

> On Mar 10, 2025, at 8:10 PM, Paul Wouters wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 12:52 PM Sean Turner <mailto:s...@sn3rd.com>> wrote: >> >> >>> On Mar 6, 2025, at 9:33 PM, Paul Wouters >>> mailto:40aiven...@dmarc.ietf.org>> >

[TLS] Re: AD review draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10

> On Mar 6, 2025, at 9:33 PM, Paul Wouters > wrote: > > AD review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10 > > I have some comments and small change requests. Do let me know if I got it > wrong. Will do. BTW - one choice for you below. > Section 3 > > Settin

[TLS] AD review draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10

AD review of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10 I have some comments and small change requests. Do let me know if I got it wrong. Section 3 Setting a value to "Y" or "D" in the "Recommended" column requires IETF Standards Action [RFC8126]. Any state tran

[TLS] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10

Deirdre Connolly has requested publication of draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10 as Proposed Standard on behalf of the TLS working group. Please verify the document's state at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis/ ___ TLS ma

[TLS] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10.txt

Joe: Thanks for getting this posted. TLS WG: This version address the comments we got (Rich was the only one). It is ready to go to the AD. spt > On Nov 3, 2024, at 22:26, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10.txt is now available. It is a wo

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-10.txt Pages: 18

[TLS] Re: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis, "IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS”

Thanks Rich. These all look good to me. spt > On Oct 16, 2024, at 15:23, Salz, Rich > wrote: > > This email starts the working group last call for "IANA Registry Updates for > TLS and DTLS” I-D, located here: > > I found a few nits. Diff at https://github.com/tlswg/rfc8447bis/pull/58/files

[TLS] Re: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis, "IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS”

This email starts the working group last call for "IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS” I-D, located here: I found a few nits. Diff at https://github.com/tlswg/rfc8447bis/pull/58/files ___ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an ema

[TLS] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis, "IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS”

This email starts the working group last call for "IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS” I-D, located here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis/ The WG Last Call will end Wednesday October 30th 2024 @ 2359 UTC. Please review the I-D and submit issues and pull req

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-09.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-09.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-09.txt Pages: 18

Re: [TLS] -rfc8447bis: s15 ambiguity

> Hi! I submitted the following PR to address the point Rich and ekr discussed > about an ambiguity in s15 of -rfc8447bis: > https://github.com/tlswg/rfc8447bis/pull/56 Looks good to me, thanks. ___ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/m

[TLS] -rfc8447bis: s15 ambiguity

Hi! I submitted the following PR to address the point Rich and ekr discussed about an ambiguity in s15 of -rfc8447bis: https://github.com/tlswg/rfc8447bis/pull/56 Cheers, spt ___ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt

> Requests to experts for published documents tends to come from IANA directly. > But I think that your remedy is fine. By my memory, about 80-90 percent come from IANA; some come directly to the TLS experts and we have to remember to CC them into the thread. And requiring IANA to forward the

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt

On Wed, Jan 31, 2024, at 07:16, Salz, Rich wrote: >> This version incorporates all known issues. The authors believe this version >> is ready for WGLC. > > Yes, pretty much. Two nits than can be fixed during AUTH48 > > This sentence in Sec 15 confuses me: > For this reason, designated exper

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt

> This version incorporates all known issues. The authors believe this version > is ready for WGLC. Yes, pretty much. Two nits than can be fixed during AUTH48 This sentence in Sec 15 confuses me: For this reason, designated experts should decline code point registrations for documents

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt

Hi! With author hat on, This version incorporates all known issues. The authors believe this version is ready for WGLC. spt > On Jan 23, 2024, at 13:43, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt is now available. It is a work > item of t

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-08.txt Pages: 18

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

ers, John Preuß Mattsson From: Valery Smyslov Date: Friday, 8 December 2023 at 13:24 To: John Mattsson , 'Sean Turner' , 'Salz, Rich' Cc: 'TLS List' Subject: RE: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis? Hi John, two more clarifications

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

of order records and I think the receiver might need to try several keys before finding the correct one. Cheers, John Preuß Mattsson From: Valery Smyslov Date: Friday, 8 December 2023 at 13:24 To: John Mattsson , 'Sean Turner' , 'Salz, Rich' Cc: 'TLS List' Sub

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

x27; Subject: Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis? Hi, Valery Smyslov wrote: >No, they include only hash (GOSTR341112) and AEAD cipher (MAGMA_MGM or >KUZNYECHIK_MGM). >Their order in the names is unusual (hash first, cipher second). Yes, my misundersta

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

packet rekeying Cheers, John From: Valery Smyslov Date: Wednesday, 6 December 2023 at 19:04 To: John Mattsson , 'Sean Turner' , 'Salz, Rich' Cc: 'TLS List' Subject: RE: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis? Hi John, just a clarification: The _GOS

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis? > On Dec 6, 2023, at 08:02, Salz, Rich > wrote: > > Yes, I think information regarding if a cipher suite is for TLS 1.3 is very > needed to have. I already asked for that in > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/0gDKfXJvAemFDm7MWc

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 03:46:32PM +, John Mattsson wrote: > That sounds great. > > Who is doing the work of adding “for TLS 1.3 and later”? > > My understanding is that the currently registered TLS 1.3 cipher suites are: > > Value Description > 0x13,0x01 TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 > 0x13,0x02 T

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

I am not aware of any particular work to say which ciphers can be used where. ___ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

did not think this was how TLS 1.3 cipher suites were supposed to be used. Cheers, John Preuß Mattsson From: Sean Turner Date: Wednesday, 6 December 2023 at 14:55 To: Salz, Rich , John Mattsson Cc: TLS List Subject: Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis? > On De

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

> On Dec 6, 2023, at 08:02, Salz, Rich > wrote: > > Yes, I think information regarding if a cipher suite is for TLS 1.3 is very > needed to have. I already asked for that in > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/0gDKfXJvAemFDm7MWcS1DTDVIe8/ > > In addition, I would also like to inform

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

Yes, I think information regarding if a cipher suite is for TLS 1.3 is very needed to have. I already asked for that in https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/0gDKfXJvAemFDm7MWcS1DTDVIe8/

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

hard for someone to find out which cipher suites are usable for TLS 1.3, DTLS 1.3, and QUIC) Cheers, John From: TLS on behalf of Salz, Rich Date: Thursday, 20 April 2023 at 21:17 To: tls@ietf.org Subject: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis? I’m starting to write the d

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-07.txt

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 10:14 AM Sean Turner wrote: > > Hi! -06 and -07 incorporate the “Comment” column that we discussed at IETF > 118. Joe and I are planning to ask for WGLC on this version. Minor quibble with the IANA instructions for instruction type. It reads " Setting a value to "Y" or "

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-07.txt

> Hi! -06 and -07 incorporate the “Comment” column that we discussed at IETF > 118. Joe and I are planning to ask for WGLC on this version. Looks good to me, thanks! ___ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-07.txt

Hi! -06 and -07 incorporate the “Comment” column that we discussed at IETF 118. Joe and I are planning to ask for WGLC on this version. spt > On Nov 27, 2023, at 10:11, internet-dra...@ietf.org wrote: > > Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-07.txt is now available. It is a work

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-07.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-07.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-07.txt Pages: 18

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-06.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-06.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-06.txt Pages: 18

[TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-05.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-05.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) WG of the IETF. Title: IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS Authors: Joe Salowey Sean Turner Name:draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis-05.txt Pages: 17

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 13:37 Christopher Wood wrote: > Sorry for the delay. This slipped through the cracks. Given that we went > through this process with the text as-is, I think we can live without this > change. > Hi, There were a bunch of boring suggestions in my message*. I hope Ekr consi

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On May 22, 2023, at 6:49 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 1:09 PM Rob Sayre wrote:On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 12:59 PM Christopher Wood wrote:We trust the editors will faithfully enact all editorial changes they agree with as the document moves

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On 22/05/2023 20:59, Christopher Wood wrote: ___ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls Chris Many, although not all, of your messages to the TLS list display the above and no more. This is indeed what the message

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 3:49 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 1:09 PM Rob Sayre wrote: > >> The one real problem (imho) with the document is nested MUST requirements: >> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/6x0uEVIUCBwMOIaV3UBzqeRt6Ys/ >> >> EKR called this "guidance", but

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 1:09 PM Rob Sayre wrote: > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 12:59 PM Christopher Wood > wrote: > >> We trust the editors will faithfully enact all editorial changes they >> agree with as the document moves forward in the process. If there were >> non-editorial comments that we ove

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 12:59 PM Christopher Wood wrote: > We trust the editors will faithfully enact all editorial changes they > agree with as the document moves forward in the process. If there were > non-editorial comments that we overlooked, could you please resurface them? > Hi, I made th

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

We trust the editors will faithfully enact all editorial changes they agree with as the document moves forward in the process. If there were non-editorial comments that we overlooked, could you please resurface them?Best,Chris On May 21, 2023, at 7:44 PM, Rob Sayre wrote:On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 5

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 5:03 AM Christopher Wood wrote: > Thanks to everyone who provided reviews and feedback for these documents! > I believe we have consensus to move both forward with changes that have > been incorporated during the review cycle. We’ll start preparing the > shepherd writeups

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

S” I-Ds, located here: > > - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis > - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis > > The WG Last Call will end on April 18, 2023. > > Please review the documents and submit issues or pull requests via the GitHub > rep

Re: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

Ping. From: "Salz, Rich" Date: Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 3:17 PM To: "tls@ietf.org" Subject: [TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis? I’m starting to write the draft about TLS 1.2 being frozen. It occurred to me that every TLS registry might need

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Thanks for the info. >This tweak was introduced as a result of discussions in Philly (IETF115) to >address David Schinazi’s comment at the mic. If I remember correctly, the >discussion was that there’s not really a concern about exhausting the registry >space because it’s a “string" registry, b

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

> On Apr 11, 2023, at 12:50, Salz, Rich wrote: > > I am commenting on 8447bis. This document is just about ready to move > forward, but two fixes are needed. > > Why there are Notes still in the doc (e.g., near end of section 6 it says > about weaker elliptic curves) and think those should b

[TLS] "Notes" column in draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis?

I’m starting to write the draft about TLS 1.2 being frozen. It occurred to me that every TLS registry might need a “notes” column. If someone defines a new crypto algorithm, sat AEGIS being considered in CFRG, we want to assign it a number but have a note saying “only for TLS 1.3 and later” We

[TLS] Fwd: WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Hi, I think RFC8447bis need to say something about at least DTLS 1.3 Record Number Encryption The two AEGIS algorithms recently got code points and DTLS-OK = Y even if there was no specification on how to do DTLS 1.3 Record Number Encryption https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-cfrg-aegi

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 at 06:32, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > > Hiya, > > On 05/04/2023 02:47, Sean Turner wrote: > > A post IETF 116 bump to make sure folks get their reviews in. If you > > look at the diffs from RFC 8446 you can see not that much has > > changed. We will also take “I read it and it lo

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 12:15 AM Ilari Liusvaara wrote: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 01:18:17AM +, Peter Gutmann wrote: > > On the subject of clarification, the update also needs to explain why > PSK is > > split across two separate extensions, psk_key_exchange_modes and > > pre_shared_key, with

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 01:18:17AM +, Peter Gutmann wrote: > On the subject of clarification, the update also needs to explain why PSK is > split across two separate extensions, psk_key_exchange_modes and > pre_shared_key, with complex and awkward reconciliation rules between then, > and why th

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Ben Smyth writes: >Because pre_shared_key appears in ClientHello and ServerHello, whilst >psk_key_exchange_modes only appears in the former? That's a circular argument, pre_shared_key already has two different forms that depend on whether it's the ClientHello or ServerHello it so this is saying

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, 12 Apr 2023, 03:18 Peter Gutmann, wrote: > On the subject of clarification, the update also needs to explain why PSK > is > split across two separate extensions, psk_key_exchange_modes and > pre_shared_key Because pre_shared_key appears in ClientHello and ServerHello, whilst psk_key_exc

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On the subject of clarification, the update also needs to explain why PSK is split across two separate extensions, psk_key_exchange_modes and pre_shared_key, with complex and awkward reconciliation rules between then, and why the PSK has to be the last extension in the client hello. I can't see an

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

I am commenting on 8446bis. I re-read the draft, it is almost ready to move forward. All but one of the open issues are basically editorial. I think John Mattsson's issue [1] on PSK identity guidance is worth including; I do not recall much WG discussion of this. [1] https://github.com/tlswg/

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

I am commenting on 8447bis. This document is just about ready to move forward, but two fixes are needed. Why there are Notes still in the doc (e.g., near end of section 6 it says about weaker elliptic curves) and think those should be resolved, one way or another, before advancing out of the WG

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 1:05 PM Rob Sayre wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:53 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:50 PM Rob Sayre wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:26 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: >>> Thanks for your feedback. Most of these are editorial comm

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:53 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:50 PM Rob Sayre wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:26 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: >> >>> Thanks for your feedback. Most of these are editorial comments and >>> so I think they're my decision as editor about whic

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:50 PM Rob Sayre wrote: > On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:26 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > >> Thanks for your feedback. Most of these are editorial comments and >> so I think they're my decision as editor about which ones to take >> absent some instruction from the chairs. >> > >

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:26 PM Eric Rescorla wrote: > Thanks for your feedback. Most of these are editorial comments and > so I think they're my decision as editor about which ones to take > absent some instruction from the chairs. > I agree concerning most of them. One just finds nitpicks if y

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

This was discussed extensively when 8446 was published and there wasn't consensus to make such a change. If the chairs want to re-open this issue, please weigh in. -Ekr On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 7:32 PM Stephen Farrell wrote: > > Hiya, > > On 05/04/2023 02:47, Sean Turner wrote: > > A post IETF 1

Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Thanks for your feedback. Most of these are editorial comments and so I think they're my decision as editor about which ones to take absent some instruction from the chairs. On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 10:43 PM Rob Sayre wrote: > Hi, > > I'm still not sure about the list/vector rename. Aside from tha

[TLS] Fwd: WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis

Too fast. Very sorry, it is already linked to that thread. Weitergeleitete Nachricht Betreff: Re: [TLS] WGLC for draft-ietf-tls-rfc8446bis and draft-ietf-tls-rfc8447bis Datum: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 10:47:11 +0200 Von: Achim Kraus An: Martin Thomson , tls@ietf.org Let me try to

  1   2   >