Re: [TLS] [OPSEC] Call For Adoption: draft-wang-opsec-tls-proxy-bp

2020-07-28 Thread Arnaud.Taddei.IETF
I strongly support this work as it represents capabilities that are being developed, deployed and used in practice. It has good intentions and provides a good approach in the context of defense in depth approaches. No security cannot be just on both ends of the communication. One can dream

Re: [TLS] TLS Impact on Network Security draft updated

2019-07-23 Thread Arnaud.Taddei.IETF
+1, neutrality is appreciated, thank you Sean Collecting expressed views should prevail in a neutral way, there is no reason why inappropriate behaviour should be tolerated and let the impression that the loudest voice is prevailing Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.

Re: [TLS] ETSI releases standards for enterprise security and data centre management

2018-12-12 Thread Arnaud.Taddei.IETF
n and avoid rehashing the previous > debate regarding draft-rhrd-tls-tls13-visibility, parts of this draft should > be rescoped or removed. Authors are free to take this material to an AD and > seek sponsorship, or to the ISE/IAB for further guidance. > > Cheers

Re: [TLS] ETSI releases standards for enterprise security and data centre management

2018-12-06 Thread Arnaud.Taddei.IETF
I am really surprised how the answers you don't like are systematically put on denial. Can you explain me what leads you to think that some people here are not concerned by the list of people you list? this is an assumption and the wrong assumption. Perhaps on the contrary we are concerned