On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 6:20 AM Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com> wrote:
> 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]. > I agree that's clear. Not sure how I misunderstood that, but in that case, I think that this may be going too far, for the usual reasons why it's not helpful to restrict IANA registrations of new stuff. Don't we expect this just to result in squatting. -Ekr > > > 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/ > > > > >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
