I prefer TLS 1.3, because is signals continuity with the ongoing TLS deployment efforts.
-- Christian Huitema > On Nov 18, 2016, at 6:47 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > +1 --- keep TLS 1.3 > > Cheers, > - Ira > >> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:16 AM, Hubert Kario <hka...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Friday, 18 November 2016 11:12:48 CET Sean Turner wrote: >> > At IETF 97, the chairs lead a discussion to resolve whether the WG should >> > rebrand TLS1.3 to something else. Slides can be found @ >> > https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-tls-rebranding-aka-pr6 >> > 12-01.pdf. >> > >> > The consensus in the room was to leave it as is, i.e., TLS1.3, and to not >> > rebrand it to TLS 2.0, TLS 2, or TLS 4. We need to confirm this decision >> > on the list so please let the list know your top choice between: >> > >> > - Leave it TLS 1.3 >> > - Rebrand TLS 2.0 >> > - Rebrand TLS 2 >> > - Rebrand TLS 4 >> >> Keep it at TLS 1.3. >> >> TLS 2.0 and 2 are just too likely to be confused with SSL 2. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Hubert Kario >> Senior Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team >> Web: www.cz.redhat.com >> Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic >> _______________________________________________ >> TLS mailing list >> TLS@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >> > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
