On 27/10/2020 23:27, Eric Rescorla wrote:
In fact, it*is* the IETF process, or rather one permitted IETF process,since RFC 8874.
I don't believe the current case matches my recollection of that, but I've not checked in detail. The lack of list discussion certainly smells wrong to me.
If you think the chairs are not following the IETF process, I would encourage you to contact the AD rather than arguing with me.
I am not arguing with you. I am discussing an avoidable spec bug, and how that might've happened, on the TLS WG list. S.
OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
