- replying to my own message We are going to close out this WGLC and move the document to the "Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead - Revised I-D Needed” state as there are couple of comments that need to be addressed from Magnus, MT, BK, and Valery.
I will work on the Shepherd Write-Up and once I hear back from the authors I will move it to “Submitted to IESG for Publication". spt > On Nov 24, 2025, at 09:20, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > A final reminder that this WGLC ends tomorrow. > > spt > >> On Nov 20, 2025, at 11:00, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Another reminder that this is still on-going. >> >> spt >> >>> On Nov 13, 2025, at 19:25, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Just a reminder that this is still on-going. >>> >>> spt >>> >>>> On Nov 4, 2025, at 23:55, Sean Turner via Datatracker <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-super-jumbo-record-limit-02 (Ends >>>> 2025-11-25) >>>> >>>> This message starts a 3-week WG Last Call for this document. >>>> >>>> Abstract: >>>> TLS 1.3 records limit the inner plaintext (TLSInnerPlaintext) size to >>>> 2^14 + 1 bytes, which includes one byte for the content type. >>>> Records also have a 3-byte overhead due to the fixed opaque_type and >>>> legacy_record_version fields. This document defines a TLS extension >>>> that allows endpoints to negotiate a larger maximum inner plaintext >>>> size, up to 2^30 - 256 bytes, while reducing overhead. >>>> >>>> File can be retrieved from: >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-super-jumbo-record-limit/ >>>> >>>> Please review and indicate your support or objection to proceed with the >>>> publication of this document by replying to this email keeping [email protected] >>>> in copy. Objections should be motivated and suggestions to resolve them are >>>> highly appreciated. >>>> >>>> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded again of the >>>> Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP >>>> 79 >>>> [1]. Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the >>>> provisions of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of >>>> any. Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy >>>> can >>>> be found at [3]. >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/ >>>> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/ >>>> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
