Hi! The chairs have judged that there is consensus to request an early code point for this I-D.
While there was some discussion about what the Name value should be, there was no consensus on a new Name value and it is not clear that choosing a different name from where the values comes from is of benefit. spt > On Sep 24, 2024, at 14:17, Sean Turner <s...@sn3rd.com> wrote: > > Hi! After discussions with the author (David Benjamin) of > draft-ietf-tls-key-share-prediction [0], I would like to determine whether > there is consensus to request an “early” * code point request for a > 'tls-supported-group' entry in the Service Parameter Keys registry; see > Section 5 of the I-D. The point of this consensus call is to determine > whether you think this I-D is stable enough to request a code point in the > Expert Review range [1]. Please let the list know by 8 October 2023 if you > support this “early" allocation. > > * Early is in quotes because, technically, this is not an early IANA > allocation as defined in [2]; I am just calling it “early" because it’s > before the I-D is an RFC. I confirmed with the Service Parameter Keys DEs > (Designated Experts) that we can get a code point in the Expert Review space > if the I-D is stable; if not, then we should be using the Private Use space. > > spt > > [0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-key-share-prediction/ > [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/dns-svcb/dns-svcb.xhtml > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7120/ _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
