Throwing my hat into the ring, the basic record protocol has not changed. If anything, what is currently referred to as TLSv1.3 is really just a major update to the handshake messages.
If the record protocol were to change to use a sane 4-byte header (which I proposed many months ago), then I think that calling it TLSv4 or equivalent would be appropriate. At this point, I’d prefer to keep it TLSv1.3, since I don’t consider this a significant update to the protocol. -- -Todd Short // tsh...@akamai.com<mailto:tsh...@akamai.com> // "One if by land, two if by sea, three if by the Internet." On Nov 21, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir.i...@gmail.com<mailto:ynir.i...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 21 Nov 2016, at 20:43, Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com<mailto:rs...@akamai.com>> wrote: With this in mind, I'm voting in favor of any re-branding of TLS 1.3 where the protocol name remains "TLS" and major version becomes > 1. Me too. Agree _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org<mailto:TLS@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
