Hi Dhruv, I missed that one. Yes, adding that reference would be perfect.
Thanks, Ketan On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 7:09 PM Dhruv Dhody <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 Section 9: RFC 8253 is outdated because of the publication of TLS1.3 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]
