Okay a new proposal the ech_outer_extensions registration: - Set "TLS 1.3" column to “CH” - Include the following note in our new “Comments” column [0]: "Only appears in inner CH."
spt [0] PRs: https://github.com/tlswg/rfc8447bis/pull/48 https://github.com/tlswg/rfc8447bis/pull/49 > On Nov 29, 2023, at 16:09, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote: > > > Hiya, > > On 27/11/2023 14:35, Sean Turner wrote: >> Bumping this up in case anybody missed it. > > 'case it helps, I'm fine with the original mail you sent and any of > "n/a" or "CH" being used rather than "-". If it helps, I've a very > minuscule hint of a preference for "CH" so you can count me as agreeing > with MT. > > But I won't object to any other thing, 'cause I don't think there's a > perfect answer, and it matters very little, and defining a new thing > like "CHI" just for this seems OTT, but meh, I could even live with > that too. > > I'd also be fine with this just left to chair/editor discretion FWIW. > While it's good to bring things like that to the list, I don't > think you need to delay based on a small-ish set of responses. > > Cheers, > S. > > > >> spt >>> On Nov 21, 2023, at 21:03, Sean Turner <s...@sn3rd.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi! I sent over the early allocation request and the IANA folks rightly >>> pointed out two things that need to be added. This email is to make sure we >>> have agreement on the two changes to the registrations in s11.1. If you >>> don’t agree with the values proposed below please let the list know by 1 >>> December 2023. >>> >>> 1. The encrypted_client_hello and ech_outer_extensions registrations need >>> to indicate the value for the "DTLS-Only” column. Unless I am mistaken, “N” >>> is the obvious value for both. See >>> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/584 >>> >>> 2. The "TLS 1.3” column for ech_outer_extensions registration needs to >>> indicate a value; remember, this column indicates the messages in which the >>> extension may appear. Currently, it’s “”. “N/A" has been suggested, which >>> makes sense to me considering this extension never directly appears in CH, >>> SH, EE, CT, CR, NST, or HRR extensions field. We can’t use “-“ because that >>> means not used in TLS 1.3. “” is used elsewhere in the registry by only for >>> unassigned and reserved values. The following PR change “” to “N/A”: >>> https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/pull/59 >>> >>> Cheers, >>> spt >> _______________________________________________ >> TLS mailing list >> TLS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls > <OpenPGP_0xE4D8E9F997A833DD.asc> _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
