Sure. Though with that said, DTLS-SRTP should use the same code points for 1.2 and 1.3, so I don't actually know if this is an exception after all.
-Ekr On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 1:59 PM Rob Sayre <say...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 11:48 AM Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 9:58 AM Rob Sayre <say...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> There's also the fact that the TLS 1.3 was published in August 2018, but >>> DTLS 1.3 wasn't published until April 2022. So, it is kind of reasonable to >>> allow some extra time here. >>> >>> The WG could say this document doesn't apply to DTLS. Another choice >>> would be to say that it does apply to DTLS, but the WG will continue to >>> accept work for DTLS 1.2 that is DTLS-specific. The aim here being that >>> DTLS is not used as an excuse to continue to work on 1.2. >>> >> >> This seems like a fine proposal. However, as a practical matter, there >> are very few changes one could make to DTLS that would not also apply to >> TLS, so aside from DTLS-SRTP cipher suites, I'm not sure how much >> difference it makes. >> > > Makes sense, let's just not try to prove a negative in insisting that > DTLS-SRTP cipher suites are the only such thing. > > "Further, TLS 1.3 use is widespread, and new protocols should require and > assume its existence. DTLS 1.3 is a newer specification. New algorithms > or extensions that apply solely to DTLS, such as DTLS-SRTP cipher suites, > will be considered for DTLS 1.2." > > thanks, > Rob > >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
