On Wed, 10 May 2017, Sean Turner wrote:
I would definitively re-categorize this “editorial”; there’s no 2119-changes proposed and there’s no bits on the wire changes. And, I’d either reject this one because technically the existing text is correct (i.e., they are two extensions) and this really ought not of caused an interoperability problem or mark it HFDU (hold for document update). The new text does include the code points, but those can be obtained from the registry and don’t absolutely have to be included.
Sounds right to me. Paul _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
