Yes, please.
On 21/11/2019, 05:36, "TLS on behalf of Sean Turner" <[email protected] on
behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
At IETF 105, ekr presented cTLS (Compact TLS) [0][1][2] to both the TLS WG
and the LAKE BOF, which is now a chartered WG [3]. After some discussions, the
ADs suggested [4] that the TLS WG consider whether this draft be adopted as a
TLS WG item. LAKE could then later specify/refer/adopt/profile it, as
appropriate. The authors revised cTLS and presented the revised draft at IETF
106 [5]. At IETF 106 there was support for adoption of cTLS as a WG item. To
confirm this on the list: if you believe that the TLS WG should not adopt this
as a WG item, then please let the chairs know by posting a message to the TLS
list by 2359 UTC 13 December 2019 (and say why).
NOTE:
: If the consensus is that this draft should be adopted as a WG item, then
this will necessarily result in a WG rechartering discussions. We would have
gotten to this rechartering discussion anyway now that DTLS 1.3 is progressing
out of the WG.
Thanks,
Chris, Joe, and Sean
[0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/slides-105-tls-sessa-ctls/
[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rescorla-tls-ctls/
[2] https://github.com/ekr/draft-rescorla-tls-ctls
[3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rescorla-tls-ctls/
[4] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lake/kACwW7PXrmTRa4PvXQ0TA34xCvk
[5]
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/slides-106-tls-compact-tls-13-00.pdf
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any
medium. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
