On Tue, Nov 26, 2024, 11:13 AM Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com> wrote:
> Either you have new code and break compat or not. That's what really makes > the planning hard IMHO. To the extent there is risk associated the > widespread use of TLS 1.3 is a significant mitigating factor for > undiscovered bugs rolling this out won't have. > > > > Spoken by someone who has little experience in enterprise deployments. :) > True. What makes the risk lower for LTS? Enterprises would still need to confirm compatibility of the same products, roll out in stages, have a rollback plan etc. and they would have much less data on what exactly breaks, harder time getting support in new versions or in fixes given the niche nature etc. I get the draft claims that it's better than the TLS 1.3 given the long rollout cycle particularly for embedded (not enterprise) environments. But it's starting from 0 years rather than 6 years, with no formal analysis vs many, with few to zero implementations vs considerable support. Sincerely, Watson >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
