On 2 March 2016 at 14:39, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: > > Reading this over, I wonder if we're talking about the same thing. It's > probably my fault for > using the word "self-contained" here, so in the interest of clarifying, what > I meant here was > "separate".
Yes, separate was my thought. > Specifically, I think it's not going to work well to have a document that > (for instance) > replicates the rules about wire encodings, crypto, etc. [0] I do think it > would probably > be OK to have a document that profiled TLS 1.3 and then referred to the > relevant > sections in the main document for details. Yes, that was my point regarding a fork. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
