[TLS] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04: 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

Re: [TLS] Eric Rescorla's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-02: (with COMMENT)

Nits are on the editor's copy. https://github.com/tlswg/tls-record-limit/commit/8c6307f63d5c3e34d3da1747fcdfbcc54aa290f6 On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 5:31 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > This text is a bit confusing. Consider a case where a server recognizes the > extension and has no limit, but the client

Re: [TLS] Eric Rescorla's Yes on draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-02: (with COMMENT)

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > Nits are on the editor's copy. > > https://github.com/tlswg/tls-record-limit/commit/ > 8c6307f63d5c3e34d3da1747fcdfbcc54aa290f6 > > On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 5:31 AM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > This text is a bit confusing. Consider a case where

[TLS] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-02: (with COMMENT)

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-02: 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

Re: [TLS] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-02: (with COMMENT)

For the transport ADs, who both noticed the same typo: https://github.com/tlswg/tls-record-limit/commit/e36a69777ee5661c33a421d64bb48bb68c7680b9 (I think that it might have been "any", but "a" is equally good and also fewer characters) On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > Sp

Re: [TLS] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-record-limit-02: (with COMMENT)

I responded to Spencer regarding the nit. On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 4:49 AM, Mirja Kühlewind wrote: > One minor comment the title of sec 5: not sure if "deprecating" is the best > word as that maybe be read as "moved to historic" in IETF world... For this, until we move all of RFC 6066 to historic

Re: [TLS] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04: (with COMMENT)

> On Apr 2, 2018, at 15:20, Warren Kumari wrote: > > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines.