On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 12:27 PM Kaduk, Ben <[email protected]> wrote:
> The one concrete one that I remember (and can't attribute to the HTMLized > version dropping stuff) is RFC 7030 only in the header. > > I guess we can check what we want to do to DTLS as well, as RFC 6347 is > listed as Updates:-ed but that's the DTLS 1.2 spec. (6347 itself > confusingly claims in the body text to "update DTLS 1.0 to work with TLS > 1.2" but has an "Obsoletes: 4347" header.) I don't see what specifically > we update in 6347. > I think the text in question is the last paragraph of RFC 6347's Introduction: "Implementations that speak both DTLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.0 can interoperate with those that speak only DTLS 1.0 (using DTLS 1.0 of course), just as TLS 1.2 implementations can interoperate with previous versions of TLS (see Appendix E.1 of [TLS12] for details), with the exception that there is no DTLS version of SSLv2 or SSLv3, so backward compatibility issues for those protocols do not apply." This draft says "don't interoperate" in this situation. thanks, Rob
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
