On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 4:21 PM, Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: >> There's a tradeoff between respecting the official allocation processes > and avoiding real-world breakage. I think we can all make our own > assessments > on the former, but for the latter, all the evidence we have so far is a > claim > from Peter that there exists software that hardcodes this number, with no > indication of scale of deployment or ease of updating such software. > > Peter tried very hard to play by all the rules, whether they were enshrined > in formal documents, or "just" decisions by WG chairs, and everything > in-between. > > Peter says the number is in use. > > I believe him. > > Give him the damn number.
+1. I also delivered an OpenSSL-based TLS-LTS prototype to a Hoteliers working group for their smart locks last year. I have no idea how much of the code they are going to reuse (if any at all). Jeff _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
