100% support the BCP route. -- V/R, Uri
On 12/22/22, 10:16, "TLS on behalf of Peter Gutmann" <tls-boun...@ietf.org on
behalf of pgut...@cs.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
Hal Murray <halmurray+...@sonic.net> writes:
>Would a BCP be a better approach? That might provide a good setting to
>discuss the issues. There is no reason to limit a BCP to TLSv1.2 or FFDHE.
That seems like a much better idea. A deprecate RFC can only say "no"
while a
BCP can cover alternatives, in this situation do this, in that situation do
that.
Peter.
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
