On 11/07/2023 21:17, Eric Rescorla wrote:
I wouldn't want to 'permanently' encode the root programs, CT
trusted log lists or end entity compressed extensions for example.
Arguably it will be necessary to encode the database in the final RFC.
Otherwise, you have what is effectively a normative reference to the
contents of the CCADB.
I haven't thought through this completely, but I mention it because it
may affect the rest of the design decisions if we end up with the
WG having to produce the database.
To clarify: I'm fine with encoding things permanently in an RFC for use
with a specific code point. I just wouldn't want to do that for multiple
future code points to be used in future years since predicting
developments is inherently hard.
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
