Hi Eric, We removed there reference to RFC 9146. We also removed a few quotes from around IANA registry titles for consistency with the rest of the document. If you’re open to adding the quotes throughout (per typical RPC editing), please let us know.
FYI: We confirmed that the IANA updates are complete. The current files are here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.xml https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.pdf https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9846.html 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) 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) Please review and let us know if any further updates are needed or if you approve the RFC for publication. Thanks, Sandy Ginoza RFC Production Center > On Jun 30, 2026, at 7:03 PM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 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]
