Gorry Fairhurst <[email protected]> wrote: > For my side, I will be happy to clear my DISCUSS when the text explains the > current relationship to draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13, and I think you may > already have the thoughts behind that above. I am looking forward to a text > proposal.
You want me to explain in BRSKI-PRM, which updates RFC8995, why RFC8995 is completely compliant with the intention of uta-require-tls13, but is not apparently consistent with the text, because uta-require-tls13 uses BCP14 keywords incorrectly? -- Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
