On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 09:53:47PM -0400, Sean Turner wrote: > > On Oct 30, 2018, at 17:41, Nico Williams <n...@cryptonector.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 08:19:33PM -0400, Sean Turner wrote: > >> Proposed Charter Text > > > > +1, but see comments below. > > > > First off, suppose we wanted to write a successor to RFC2712 for TLS > > 1.3, should we pursue that in the TLS WG, or KITTEN WG? I'm amenable to > > either, and even both. > > I think both would be bad, but whether it goes in one or the other > would come down to whether there are enough people interested in doing > the work.
OK. I suspect we can get it done in KITTEN WG, where we have the Kerberos expertise, as it's really just a use of PSK in TLS, so we'd not need to extend TLS in any way. I think most here would agree. > > Should the DANE DNSSEC chain extension be on the charter? We do need to > > finish it. > > In the current charter, we already have generic text about extensions > and no specific text about the DANE DNSSEC draft though we adopted the > draft and there is a milestone for it. I prefer not to list every > draft we are working on in the charter specifically because then we > have to change the darn charter every time we want to adopt a draft. Just making sure! > We are going to spend a lot of time discussing the DANE DNSSEC draft. > When it gets done and what is in it is certainly up for discussion. Indeed. Thanks, Nico -- _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
