On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 10:31 PM Sandy Ginoza <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Eric, Deb* (as AD), IANA, > > Thanks for sending the markdown file along. We have updated it a bit so > that we could get output files. We have a few questions below. > > IANA, please see item 5 below. > > *Deb, please review and confirm that these updates are acceptable. We > recommend reviewing the following diffs: > > Diffs highlighting the most recent updates only: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-lastdiff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-lastrfcdiff.html (side by > side) > > The current files are available as follows: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.md > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.html > > AUTH48 diffs: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-auth48diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > > Comprehensive diffs: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > > > Eric, please review the items below. > An updated markdown file is available at: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/94ccece457fd37738390a844174a8d74e5ea4638/rfc9846.md > 1) We updated "The Transcript Hash” to be Section 4.1 — please confirm > that this is correct. > > Previously, Section 4 was nested as follows: > > 4. Handshake Protocol > 4.1. Key Exchange Messages > 4.1.1. Cryptographic Negotiation > 4.1.2. Client Hello > 4.1.3. Server Hello > 4.1.4. Hello Retry Request > … > 4.4. Authentication Messages > 4.4.1. The Transcript Hash > … > > In the updated file, kramdown-rfc complained about the nesting, which > appeared as follows: > # Handshake Protocol > ### The Transcript Hash > Thank you for fixing this. I have reverted your changes of "I.e.," to "That is". I.e., is fine. If you believe any copy-edit changes are needed at this stage, can you please flag them explicitly as below, rather than making them in the copy. > 2) Confirm "non-DHE key key establishment algorithms” is correct (occurs > 2x) > This is correct. > 3) Should this be “as 0-RTT data on connection 1”? > > … as an attacker may be able to cause the data to be > processed as 0-RTT data as connection 1 and as 1-RTT data on > connection 2. > I have corrected this. 4) To get the outputs, we updated the references to RFC 9846 to be included > as “PRE-RFC9846” - it will be updated in the XML file prior to > publication. Would you be open to not including a self-reference to RFC > 9846, and including the references in the IANA tables as plain text > "[RFC9846]” instead - this would be normal handling to avoid > self-references. > I can live with this. Deb, Sean? -Ekr
-- auth48archive mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
