On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 10:55 PM John Mattsson
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think people have very different views on what constitutes “unnecessary 
> work.” For many external SDOs, the TLS WG producing RFCs for NIST FIPS 
> 203–205 is by far the most important work the TLS WG has undertaken since RFC 
> 8446. This is reinforced by several liaison statements the TLS WG has 
> received.

I don't understand why the SDOs need this beyond what's in IANA.
>
> The first goal of the TLS WG is to “improve the applicability and suitability 
> of the TLS family of protocols for use in emerging protocols and use cases.”
>
> ISE or AD sponsorship could be a solution. However, there has been 
> significant frustration when attempting to register algorithms for SSH, with 
> some arguing that a working group is required.

>
> Ironically, I think draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email-00 could 
> have been an email.

No it couldn't have been. The whole point is to have a record of group
consensus to say "we don't do this, we do that for these reasons"
>
> Cheers,
> John
>
> From: Richard Barnes <[email protected]>
> Date: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 at 01:56
> To:
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: [TLS] Fwd: New Version Notification for 
> draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email-00.txt
>
> Hi TLS folks,
>
> Those who have worked with me know that I hate doing unnecessary work.  It 
> occurred to me that the TLS WG has been doing a lot of unnecessary work on 
> drafts that just register crypto algorithms.  This draft proposes that we 
> shouldn't do that.
>
> Submitted for your consideration,
> --Richard
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 2:53 PM
> Subject: New Version Notification for 
> draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email-00.txt
> To: Richard Barnes <[email protected]>
>
>
> A new version of Internet-Draft
> draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email-00.txt has been successfully
> submitted by Richard Barnes and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:     draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email
> Revision: 00
> Title:    Stop Doing Cryptographic Algorithm Drafts when Email to IANA is All 
> You Need
> Date:     2026-02-24
> Group:    Individual Submission
> Pages:    5
> URL:      
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email-00.txt
> Status:   
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email/
> HTML:     
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email-00.html
> HTMLized: 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-barnes-tls-this-could-have-been-an-email
>
>
> Abstract:
>
>    People keep pitching drafts to the TLS Working Group where the only
>    thing the draft does is register a code point for a cryptographic
>    algorithm.  Stop doing that.  It's unnecessary.  Write an email to
>    IANA instead.
>
>
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]



-- 
Astra mortemque praestare gradatim

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to