Section 1.1 doesn't say *how* those listed documents are updated. Might pay to include a few works on how.
Section 2 can be cut down a lot. The quote from another document is longer than the rest of the text. In many ways, saying that the IETF is moving last is not a great thing to memorialize in RFC, as much as it is useful in an Internet-Draft or in argumentation in support of publication of the doc. The title of Section 3 could be a bit clearer. It might pay to explain what RFC 7525 is in Section 6. Why does that document warrant special attention over the 70-odd other ones. Otherwise, publish this. On Sat, Apr 13, 2019, at 09:28, Christopher Wood wrote: > This is the working group last call for the "Deprecating TLSv1.0 and > TLSv1.1” draft available at: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate/ > > Please review the document and send your comments to the list by April 26, > 2019. > > Thanks, > Chris, Joe, and Sean > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls > _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
