> On 30 Nov 2020, at 01:51, Watson Ladd wrote:
>
> Dear TLS WG,
>
> I think RFC 7627 should update 5056, 5705, and maybe a few more.
>
> I noticed these omissions when looking at the kitten draft to use TLS
> 1.3 exporters. Having these updates would hopefully make clear what
> uses need to b
> On 30 Nov 2020, at 14:08, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:36 PM Olle E. Johansson <mailto:o...@edvina.net>> wrote:
>
>
> > On 30 Nov 2020, at 01:51, Watson Ladd > <mailto:watsonbl...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> &
> On 30 Nov 2020, at 14:35, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
>
> On 11/30/20 5:12 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
>>> On 30 Nov 2020, at 14:08, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 10:36 PM Olle E. Johansson >> &l
> On 30 Nov 2020, at 15:07, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:12 AM Olle E. Johansson <mailto:o...@edvina.net>> wrote:
>
>
>> On 30 Nov 2020, at 14:08, Eric Rescorla > <mailto:e...@rtfm.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
> On 1 Dec 2020, at 16:21, Salz, Rich wrote:
>
>> And how will the people who can ignore it know that it's OK for them to do
>> so?
>
> Well, frankly, that's not our problem. If someone is going to blindly insist
> on RFC conformance and doesn't recognize the wording that says "might not
> On 7 Mar 2021, at 17:25, Benjamin Kaduk
> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 07, 2021 at 12:15:24PM +, Graham Bartlett wrote:
>>
>> I would imagine that the implementation would pull the session down once
>> the certificate expires, so the session only lasts for the lifetime of the
>> certificate.
I agree here. The term “mTLS” is used more and more and there’s no
specification. If we could document a few profiles for it, like internal use in
a system, cross-organisation etc that would
be beneficial.
/O
> On 10 Sep 2024, at 09:16, John Mattsson
> wrote:
>
> I would be very supportive o
