On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 6:15 PM Sandy Ginoza <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Eric, Deb*, > > We have updated the document. > It looks like we may have missed this in earlier rounds, but we don’t see > an in-text citation for RFC 9146. We don't need one. Let's just remove it. -Ekr > Please review and let us know where one should be included. > > Notes: > - [PRE-RFC9846] has been replaced with [RFC9846] (no links). The > reference entry to RFC 9846 has been removed. > - While we prefer not to start sentences with I.e., we have left it per > your preference. > > *Deb, please confirm that the updates shown in the diffs below are > acceptable: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-ADrfcdiff.html (side by > side) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846-ADdiff.html > > Please review and let us know if any additional updates are needed > (outside of the publication date) or if you approve the RFC for > publication. > > IANA indicated the updates are complete, but I have not yet confirmed them > — we will let you know if there are any issues. > > Thanks, > Sandy Ginoza > RFC Production Center > > > > > On Jun 26, 2026, at 10:52 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > 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]
