A good plan! That draft has the 8446bis draft also referenced (so the most up to date version of TLS 1.3).
There is also a UTA draft that will be part of BCP 195 eventually which deprecates the old versions of TLS, but I don't think we have to go crazy here. What you have proposed is perfect. TYVM Deb On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 10:31 AM Samuel Sidor (ssidor) <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Deb, Dhruv, Ketan for comment and discussion. > > I'll update last statement in “Security Considerations” to: > > “Hence, securing the PCEP session using Transport Layer Security (TLS) [ > RFC8253 > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-27.html#RFC8253> > ][I-D.ietf-pce-pceps-tls13 > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-pce-controller-sr-11.html#I-D.ietf-pce-pceps-tls13>] > is RECOMMENDED as per the recommendations and best current practices > described in [RFC9325 > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-27.html#RFC9325> > ]." > > Regards, > Samuel > > *From: *Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> > *Date: *Monday, 13 October 2025 at 15:39 > *To: *Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]> > *Cc: *Deb Cooley <[email protected]>, The IESG <[email protected]>, > [email protected] <[email protected]>, > [email protected] <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]> > *Subject: *Re: Deb Cooley's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-26: > (with COMMENT) > > Hi Ketan, Deb, > > The authors can also add an additional reference to - > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-pceps-tls13/ > alongside RFC8253. > It is in the RFC editor queue. > > Thanks! > Dhruv > > On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 6:15 PM Ketan Talaulikar <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Deb, > > The current text in Section 9, reads as follows: > > Hence, securing the PCEP session using Transport Layer Security (TLS) [ > RFC8253 > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-27.html#RFC8253>] is > RECOMMENDED as per the recommendations and best current practices described > in [RFC9325 > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-27.html#RFC9325> > ]. > > So, it does cover RFC9325 that you have pointed out. There isn't an update > of RFC8253 that is available, and so hopefully this is adequate indication > of the shift to TLS 1.3? > > Thanks, > Ketan > > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 4:02 PM Deb Cooley via Datatracker < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo-26: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to > https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ > for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-sid-algo/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thank you for the secdir review by Alexey Melnikov. > > Section 9: RFC 8253 is outdated because of the publication of TLS1.3 > (RFC8446). Consider listing BCP 195 vice RFC 9325 to ensure the most recent > guidance for the implementation of TLS. > > > >
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
