Stephen Farrell <[email protected]> writes: > On 21/07/15 09:48, Eric Rescorla wrote: >> I'm not concerned about the level of effort; I'm concerned about having >> multiple normative references for the same protocol. > > Right. I don't want to risk complicating the TLS1.3 effort, esp for a > draft we don't even know will be adopted.
But supposing the self-contained profile description is not normative? I'll grant you that two normative descriptions of TLS are a bad idea. At the same time, if it's impossible to produce a concise non-normative description of what TCP-use-TLS looks like on the wire, then some of us believe that's a disadvantage for TCP-use-TLS, or at least evidence that the "minimal profile" is not sufficiently minimal. Additionally, should the wire description of TCP-use-TLS reveal any vulnerabilities, that will complicate the TLS1.3 effort, but the complication would consist of necessary bug fixes. David _______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
