Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-13 Thread Yoav Nir
So now that that is settled, publish a new draft? > On 13 Dec 2021, at 21:19, Martin Thomson wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2021, at 01:47, Salz, Rich wrote: >>> How about we split the difference and go with the first 0-15 flags for >>> standards action? We can keep the initial value of 8

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-13 Thread Martin Thomson
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021, at 01:47, Salz, Rich wrote: >>How about we split the difference and go with the first 0-15 flags for >> standards action? We can keep the initial value of 8 for >> cross-sni-resumption since that document is going through the process. (We >> could also make it 7 or

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-13 Thread Salz, Rich
>How about we split the difference and go with the first 0-15 flags for > standards action? We can keep the initial value of 8 for cross-sni-resumption > since that document is going through the process. (We could also make it 7 or > lower so we're not wasting an empty octet for this flag,

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-13 Thread Eric Rescorla
That's fine by me. On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 6:31 AM Christopher Wood wrote: > How about we split the difference and go with the first 0-15 flags for > standards action? We can keep the initial value of 8 for > cross-sni-resumption since that document is going through the process. (We > could

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-13 Thread Christopher Wood
How about we split the difference and go with the first 0-15 flags for standards action? We can keep the initial value of 8 for cross-sni-resumption since that document is going through the process. (We could also make it 7 or lower so we're not wasting an empty octet for this flag, should

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-12 Thread Eric Rescorla
I'd probably reserve slightly more for standards action, maybe the first 24 bits. Otherwise, I agree with MT. -Ekr On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 12:51 PM Yoav Nir wrote: > Well, that’s two voices for Martin’s PR and just me liking the convoluted > text that I wrote. > > Chairs, care to call

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-12 Thread Yoav Nir
Well, that’s two voices for Martin’s PR and just me liking the convoluted text that I wrote. Chairs, care to call consensus? Yoav > On 7 Dec 2021, at 23:21, Yoav Nir wrote: > > Hi. > > We have one outstanding issue about the TLS-Flags draft. It’s about the IANA > registry. The way the

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-07 Thread Martin Thomson
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021, at 08:32, Salz, Rich wrote: > As one of the current designated experts, I’d rather there were almost > no room for judgement or subjectivity in assignments. This is part of why I think that Rich is an excellent choice of designated expert :) Judgment is what we have the

Re: [TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-07 Thread Salz, Rich
As one of the current designated experts, I’d rather there were almost no room for judgement or subjectivity in assignments. ___ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

[TLS] IANA Registry for TLS-Flags

2021-12-07 Thread Yoav Nir
Hi. We have one outstanding issue about the TLS-Flags draft. It’s about the IANA registry. The way the extension is defined, low identifiers for flags result in shorter extension encoding. For this reason, we want the most popular flags to have low numbers. This is especially true for flags