The adoption call ended on Friday. There is support for adopting and working
on this draft as a WG item. A few thought the draft could/should be split into
different drafts, but the chairs believe we can split the drafts later if that
is the consensus of the WG.
NOTE: Technically, we will for
lf Of *Daniel Migault
> *Sent:* Friday, November 22, 2019 10:20 AM
> *To:* Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)
> *Cc:* TLS List
> *Subject:* Re: [TLS] Adoption call for draft-rescorla-tls-ctls
>
>
>
> I clearly support the adoption of the work, but it seems important to
&
I support this effort, and would like to point out that we have recently
published a paper [1] and a collection of tools [2] to automatically
verify the security (non malleability) of binary message formats, which
we successfully applied to all of TLS [3] (which revealed many small
specificatio
I believe that this is a worth while effort. I will be willing to review
and might contribute text
-Original Message-
From: TLS On Behalf Of Sean Turner
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 9:36 PM
To: TLS List
Subject: [TLS] Adoption call for draft-rescorla-tls-ctls
At IETF 105, ekr pre
As a co-author of the document I am in favor of adopting it. I have started
on implementation work on top of Mbed TLS already and plan to continue doing
that work as it progresses through the IETF.
-Original Message-
From: TLS On Behalf Of Sean Turner
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 1:3
: TLS List
Subject: Re: [TLS] Adoption call for draft-rescorla-tls-ctls
I clearly support the adoption of the work, but it seems important to ensure
cTLS integrates or remains in line with the work on compression that has been
accomplished at the IETF - SCHC defined in lpwan might be a
:* Sean Turner
> *Cc:* TLS List
> *Subject:* Re: [TLS] Adoption call for draft-rescorla-tls-ctls
>
>
>
> I support the adoption.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 8:36 AM Sean Turner wrote:
>
> At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS
+1, support adoption.
From: TLS On Behalf Of Dmitry Belyavsky
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 4:46 AM
To: Sean Turner
Cc: TLS List
Subject: Re: [TLS] Adoption call for draft-rescorla-tls-ctls
I support the adoption.
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 8:36 AM Sean Turner
mailto:s...@sn3rd.com
I support the adoption.
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 8:36 AM Sean Turner wrote:
> At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS WG
> and the LAKE BOF, which is now a chartered WG [3]. After some discussions,
> the ADs suggested [4] that the TLS WG consider whether this draf
I also support adoption.
On the question of how the work should be factored: It is true that this
work comprises 3-4 fairly separable technologies. However, they have in
common that they need to be pre-agreed between the client and server
(except possibly the "known certificates" mechanism, which
I support adoption of this work.
Best,
Tommy
> On Nov 21, 2019, at 1:36 PM, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS WG
> and the LAKE BOF, which is now a chartered WG [3]. After some discussions,
> the ADs suggested [4] that the TLS WG c
+1 support this adoption.
CJ
> On 21 Nov 2019, at 05:36, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS WG
> and the LAKE BOF, which is now a chartered WG [3]. After some discussions,
> the ADs suggested [4] that the TLS WG consider whether thi
Yes, please.
On 21/11/2019, 05:36, "TLS on behalf of Sean Turner" wrote:
At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS WG
and the LAKE BOF, which is now a chartered WG [3]. After some discussions, the
ADs suggested [4] that the TLS WG consider whether this draft
I’d like to see it’s adopted as well. It’s important for low-bandwidth
scenarios.
Regards,
Paul Yang
> On Nov 21, 2019, at 2:17 PM, Benjamin Beurdouche
> wrote:
>
> I support adoption.
> B.
>
>> On Nov 21, 2019, at 6:53 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I think it's a good starting
I support adoption.
B.
> On Nov 21, 2019, at 6:53 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I think it's a good starting point. I support adoption.
>
> Strongly agree.
>
> ___
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
I support adoption.
Best,
Chris (no hat)
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019, at 1:57 PM, Karthik Bhargavan wrote:
> I support adoption.
>
> > On 21 Nov 2019, at 06:53, Salz, Rich wrote:
> >
> >> I think it's a good starting point. I support adoption.
> >
> > Strongly agree.
> >
> > _
I support adoption.
> On 21 Nov 2019, at 06:53, Salz, Rich wrote:
>
>> I think it's a good starting point. I support adoption.
>
> Strongly agree.
>
> ___
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
__
>I think it's a good starting point. I support adoption.
Strongly agree.
___
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
I support adoption.
In the spirit of Ted Hardie's comment on dividing the work into pieces, I'd
like to suggest putting the handshake compression into a separate draft
from the certificate compression. Certificate compression could be made
into an extension that is usable in standard TLS. cTLS ca
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019, at 13:36, Sean Turner wrote:
> [...] if you believe that the TLS WG should not adopt this as a
> WG item, then please let the chairs know by posting a message to the
> TLS list by 2359 UTC 13 December 2019 (and say why).
I know you want dissent, but I thought I would instea
Hi,
I think it's a good starting point. I support adoption.
Regards,
Valery.
> At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS WG
> and the LAKE BOF, which is now a chartered WG [3]. After some
discussions,
> the ADs suggested [4] that the TLS WG consider whether this dr
I support adoption.
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 9:36 PM Sean Turner wrote:
> At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS WG
> and the LAKE BOF, which is now a chartered WG [3]. After some discussions,
> the ADs suggested [4] that the TLS WG consider whether this draft be
22 matches
Mail list logo
