> On May 21, 2019, at 22:13, Salz, Rich <rs...@akamai.com> wrote:
>
>
>> I'd be opposed to this last option without IANA/IETF being on board. By
>> doing so
> we are effectively no longer compliant with IETF TLS since we're using
> certain
> codepoints and version numbers to mean things that IETF/IANA have no
> visibility
> of, i.e. we would be doing exactly what Rich was worried about. I don't see
> IANA/IETF doing this anytime soon.
>
> For the most part, getting IANA on board requires someone in authority email
> to tls-regis...@iana.org asking for code points and pointing to their spec.
’someone in authority’ here means the author of the spec who is asking for code
points?
>
