> On 29 Sep 2013, at 08:51, ianG <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 28/09/13 20:07 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote: >> >> b) is TLS1.3 (hopefully) and maybe some extensions for earlier >> versions of TLS as well > > > SSL/TLS is a history of fiddling around at the edges. If there is to be any > hope, start again. Remember, we know so much more now. Call it TLS2 if you > want. > > Start with a completely radical set of requirements. Then make it so. There > are a dozen people here who could do it. > > Why not do the requirements, then ask for competing proposals? Choose 1. It > worked for NIST, and committees didn't work for anyone. > > A competition for TLS2 would bring out the best and leave the bureaurats > fuming and powerless. >
Sounds like a suggestion to make on the tls wg list. It might get some support, though I'd guess not everyone would want to do that S S > > iang > _______________________________________________ > The cryptography mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography _______________________________________________ The cryptography mailing list [email protected] http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
