Thanks for the review!
* - I think QUIC should be mentioned already in section 1.1 and mentioned
everytime DTLS is mentioned
I made some changes so that things are more “equal” at
https://github.com/richsalz/draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis/pull/48 Please take a
look.
* - The document use
Hi John, thank you very much for your review.
We are tracking your comments here:
* https://github.com/yaronf/I-D/issues/377
* https://github.com/yaronf/I-D/issues/378
* https://github.com/yaronf/I-D/issues/379
* https://github.com/yaronf/I-D/issues/380
* https://github.com/y
Hi,
I quickly looked at -06. Looks ready for WGLC. Two high level comments.
- I think QUIC should be mentioned already in section 1.1 and mentioned
everytime DTLS is mentioned Otherwise the document feels old already when it is
published. QUIC already makes up a huge part of internet traffic (o
Hi,
I reviwed the whole document. Looks fine in general. Some comments:
- "Those who implement and deploy TLS and DTLS, in particular versions 1.2 or
earlier of these protocols"
Delete "or earlier". As these versions are "MUST NOT negotiate". Might be good
to mention this deprecation in the i
