Hi list,
> seems like this is not only undesirable, but inaccurate.
maybe I'm wrong, but in couple of cases we have seen, that
implementations done before a RFC has been release differs
from that. Sometimes even natural, because the RFC has evolved
and not all implementations are able to follow that in short
term.
Therefore these are strong words for something which I would
consider as an iterative process of improvements.
br
Achim
Am 12.04.25 um 02:33 schrieb Stephen Farrell:
Hiya,
On 11/04/2025 17:29, Sean Turner wrote:
Here’s a link to the latest version:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-keylogfile/
I had a look at the diff, and at the latest openssl code, just
released this week as openssl 3.5, and it looks to me like the
labels in the draft's IANA registry do not in fact match that
code very well at all.
That seems like another basis (not previously raised) on which
to say this is not ready to be published - seems like this is
not only undesirable, but inaccurate.
Cheers,
S.
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
