On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:43 PM Adam Langley <a...@imperialviolet.org> wrote: People on this list who manage large corporate networks may wish to pay attention to this: while you may not have updated servers to TLS 1.3 yet, eventually it'll happen and I suspect some will find a significant amount of things like TPMs, in which you currently have client-certificate keys, which only sign with PKCS#1 v1.5. Without this draft adopted and implemented ahead of time, it's going to be painful.
Adam - Wanted to thank you for the call-out to people on the list managing large corporate networks. Looking into the mutual authentication supported protocols issue that you and David raised. Will evaluate potential future impact. Cheers, Darin On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 4:43 PM Adam Langley <a...@imperialviolet.org> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 11:33 AM Christopher Wood <c...@heapingbits.net> > wrote: > >> The adoption call is now (belatedly) finished. At this time, there's not >> enough interest to take this on as a WG item. We encourage further >> discussion on the list, perhaps based on subsequent draft updates, and will >> revisit adoption in the future if interest grows. >> > > People on this list who manage large corporate networks may wish to pay > attention to this: while you may not have updated servers to TLS 1.3 yet, > eventually it'll happen and I suspect some will find a significant amount > of things like TPMs, in which you currently have client-certificate keys, > which only sign with PKCS#1 v1.5. Without this draft adopted and > implemented ahead of time, it's going to be painful. > > > Cheers > > AGL > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
