>> I'm not Martin, but I believe that his point is that both TLS ciphersuites >>and TLS supported groups/EC curves
>> permit registration outside of the IETF process based on the existence of.a >> specification. As long as PQC can >> fit into new ciphersuites and group types, then anyone can specify it for >> TLS 1.2, and it would in fact be >> TLS, just not standardized or Recommended. > > That is not what the just-adopted draft says. It says that except for ALPN > and exporters that no new > registrations will be accepted for TLS 1.2 and that new entries should have a > Note comment that says > “for TLS 1.3 or later”. This is a change in the current policy. It has > always said this; see page 3 of [1]. Which is why this “just-adopted draft” is misguided and will probably be ignored in the field. Those who can move to 1.3+, will do so, regardless of this draft. Those who can’t, would do whatever’s appropriate in their case – again, regardless of this draft. > At the last meeting we decided NOT to freeze DTLS 1.2 since DTLS 1.3 has so > little deployment[4]. > This has complicated the wording of the above statement, which was raised at > [2] and [3] [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/117/materials/slides-117-tls-new-draft-tls-12-is-frozen-00 [2] https://github.com/richsalz/tls12-frozen/issues/10 [3] https://github.com/richsalz/tls12-frozen/pull/13 [4] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-118-tls-202311060830/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
