Due to my moderately competent use of GitHub, draft-06 does not include
the resolution of Mirja's comments. That will be part of the next draft.
Sorry.
-- Christian Huitema
On 9/18/2019 2:09 PM, Christian Huitema wrote:
OK, I just submitted draft-06. As the automated message says:
The IETF
On 9/18/2019 11:18 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
No worries!
I'd work with the responsible AD to coordinate when to publish a new
version.
I do have one comment below -- regarding the multi-party security
context -- that isn't really editorial and which isn't addressed in
the github version. Do
OK, I just submitted draft-06. As the automated message says:
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-sni-encryption/
There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-sni-encryption-06
No worries!
I'd work with the responsible AD to coordinate when to publish a new
version.
I do have one comment below -- regarding the multi-party security
context -- that isn't really editorial and which isn't addressed in the
github version. Do you have any thoughts on it? Am I just
Thanks, Adam
I appreciate the feedback, and in fact I need to apologize. We have a
new version of the draft ready at
https://github.com/tlswg/sniencryption, which takes into account the
comments received before Saturday 15, but does not take into account the
latest round of comments from Alissa,
Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tls-sni-encryption-05: Yes
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
