hi Renzo, all,
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 at 12:03, Renzo Navas wrote:
> 1. [IPR] Can you please individually confirm that you have
> declared/complied with the IPR disclosure obligations described in BCP
> 79 ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ )?
I am not aware of any IPR relating to this docume
Hi,
I have reviewed the draft and I have some comments. If these are fixed I think
the document is ready for publishing.
Major:
>This SHOULD be TLS 1.3 or TLS 1.2, depending on the circumstances
>described in the above paragraphs.
This could be interpretated as TLS 1.1 can be supported on a SHO
>Any new protocol that uses TLS MUST specify as its default TLS 1.3.
This does not age well if TLS 1.4 is done. I suggest changing to 1.3 or later.
We did have a short discussion in person and on-list about this. Here’s a
message from the latter:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uta/p7qohfJ
It was just a minor comment. I can live with the current text. The important
thing to change is the related sentences
“When the API allows it, clients SHOULD specify just the minimum version they
want. This SHOULD be TLS 1.3 or TLS 1.2, depending on the circumstances
described in the above par
