On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com> wrote: > Bear in mind that what we (or at least I) want out of not publishing a > spec is that this technology not be present by default in TLS > implementations. If someone wants to maintain a set of patches, there's > not much we can do about it, and I don't honestly care *because* there > isn't much that we can do about it. What I do not want to see is *the > IETF* recommending this solution. > > It would be very nice if the people who are hot on a solution to this > problem were willing to do the work to do the three-way protocol. But the > purpose of pointing out that that is the right solution is to say "if you > want to solve this problem in the IETF, here is what we could do that might > get IETF consensus." >
Agreed. <req:newsletter-subscribe />
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
