On 27.11.25 22:29, Eric Rescorla wrote:

In this context I generally agree that "application profile" refers to
an IETF standards track document describing the use of TLS with some
other protocol.

Thanks for stating in more understandable way but I am still lost. RFC 9151 (CNSA TLS profile) [0] is informational. Intended status (as of now) of CNSA2 TLS profile [1] is also informational. Am I missing something here?

John mentioned 3GPP; I couldn't find any draft on that defining a TLS profile. Did I miss something?

Anyway, my question mainly originated from this statement:

> Constrained devices, for example, often support only one of secp256r1 or X25519.

I don't see how this is connecting to any standard track document. If device vendors start issuing their own profiles (my perception of what this sentence means; John may correct me if I am wrong) and still claim to be compatible with RFC 8446 since they have a "profile", then how does this MTI bring in any benefit?

Two concrete questions:

1. (trying to phrase my /authority/ question more precisely) Is IETF
   the /only/ body to define "application profile standard"? or do
   other SDOs count as "application profile standard" as well?
2. Does it necessarily have to be standard track document?

-Usama

[0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9151/

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-becker-cnsa2-tls-profile/

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to